why do straight people sexualize LGBTQ+ people? (a video & essay)

Last month was the 3rd year anniversary of the release of Sexed Up: How Society Sexualizes Us, and How We Can Fight Back. And since this is Pride month, I figured I'd share this video of me reading from the “queer chapter” of Sexed Up! The video is called Why Do Straight People Sexualize Queer People? LGBTQ+ Stereotypes, Sexualization & (imagined) “Contagiousness” – please watch & like & subscribe & share widely!

The YouTube show notes contain the following "chapters" of the video – you can use the time stamps there to skip ahead to particular sections if you wish: 

• 0:00 Introduction (defining sexualization & the Predator/Prey mindset)
• 3:07 Queer people are “marked by sex” and stereotyped as “fakes”
• 6:30 Sexualized stereotypes of gay men
• 7:00 Sexualized stereotypes of lesbians
• 8:45 Sexualized stereotypes of asexuals
• 10:10 Sexualized stereotypes of bisexuals
• 13:30 Trans people and the “worst of both worlds” & “sexual deceiver” tropes 
• 16:40 Anti-queer stigma is viewed “contagious”
• 19:15 Recurring claims that LGBTQIA+ & people of color “prey on women & children”
• 23:50 Critiques of “respectability politics” and “contagiousness politics”
• 29:00 Sexualization-centric approaches to queer activism

As if that wasn't enough, I wrote a companion essay entitled The Worst of Both Worlds: How Straight People Sexualize Queer and Trans People that places my Stigma-Contamination model of sexualization (discussed in the book and video) in the context of other feminist perspectives on sexualization. It also shares a different excerpt from the chapter (on how trans & intersex people face "The Worst of Both Worlds") that is not covered in the video. You can read it on Substack (no paywall) at the above link, or via this friend link to Medium.

As always, please share widely and give it lots of claps and likes and such!

Penises, Privilege, & Purity: a new essay about LGBTQ+ intra-community debates

So my latest Medium essay just dropped! 

It's entitled Penises, Privilege, and Feminist & LGBTQ+ Purity Politics. It's a longer read, but worth it, as it explains many intra-community debates. This includes lesbian stereotypes about bisexual women (such as the myth that we are "perpetually heterosexual privileged"), how those relate to "gender critical"/TERF stereotypes of trans women, plus recent debates between trans male/masculine and trans female/feminine communities. Basically, I show how all these sentiments stem from sexual stigma and our culture's bizarre patriarchal and heteronormative beliefs about sex and penises.

I think this is the best thing I've written since... well, since my latest book Sexed Up, I suppose. In fact, it's the first piece I've written that really builds upon some of the ideas that I introduce and flesh out in the book, including the Predator/Prey mindset and how sexual stigma shapes many popular stereotypes about queer people.

Here is the no paywall link, so you can readily share it with others: https://juliaserano.medium.com/penises-privilege-and-feminist-lgbtq-purity-politics-bafd1f25fe3e?sk=5098f46767404745b65d298b79aa8066

If you're on Twitter, here's a whole thread about it.

And if you like it, please give it lots of "claps" (up to 50, I think) so that other Medium users will see it.

This essay was made possible by my Patreon supporters. If you appreciate that I make writings like this available for free online, please consider supporting me there.

reviews & an excerpt from my new book Sexed Up!

My latest email update just came out. If you want to receive these sorts of updates directly into your inbox, you can sign up here. Since it's chock-full of reviews, excerpts, and info about my new book Sexed Up, I have transcribed it here in its entirety...

In last month's update, I announced my new book, Sexed Up: How Society Sexualizes Us, and How We Can Fight Back (Seal Press), and encouraged y'all to pre-order it. It officially came out a week ago, so hopefully many of you have your copies by now and are diving in!

If you haven't picked up the book already, no worries, you can do so today! It’s available in hardcover, ebook, and audiobook – those links will take you to the Seal Press website, which offers a variety of outlets to choose from. You can also go to your local bookstore or library and ask them to order a copy for you. 

If you are hesitant, this email should have what you need to convince you to pick up a copy of Sexed Up!

For starters, last week I published Sexed Up: a chapter-by-chapter preview of my new book on Medium. As the name suggests, it describes all the sex, sexuality, and sexualization topics that are covered in the book, and which chapter(s) you'll find them in.

The Guardian image that accompanied my excerpt

Also last week, The Guardian published an excerpt from Chapter 3, "Unwanted Attention." Their version is entitled What I learned about street harassment after I transitioned. While most people who have navigated the world being perceived as female will likely relate to some of the experiences I describe, my interpretation differs somewhat from that standard feminist "sexual objectification" explanation, and provides insight into forms of street harassment faced by other marginalized groups.

In my last email update, I shared praise the book has received from other authors. Here, I will share a few of the early book reviews that have come in so far:

“Serano succeeds in explicating a wide range of complex ideas about gender, sexuality, and identity, and offers incisive new frameworks for reckoning with some of the most discussed issues in contemporary feminism and queer culture. The result is a nuanced and approachable guide to ‘making sex more equitable’.”
—Publishers Weekly (full review via link)

“Sexed Up doesn’t just identify a common problem; it identifies a common ground for solidarity and resistance. ”
—NBC News (full review via link)

“A feminist argument about sexism and patriarchy from a fully trans- and queer-inclusive point of view... When Serano introduces a concept ... I expect the idea to pervade and permeate feminist thought.”
—Liber: a Feminist Review (full review via link)

“Sexed Up: How Society Sexualizes Us, and How We Can Fight Back gives every bit of [Julia’s] usual rigor as it interrogates the ways that people who hold stigmatized identities are desexualized, hypersexualized, sex-shamed or sex-policed. ”
—Xtra (full review via link)

“An engaging and thoughtful addition for any library’s popular human sexuality collection.”
—Library Journal (full review via link)

I will be adding new reviews, excerpts, and interviews to the Sexed Up webpage as they arise. There, you will also find links to order the book in hardcover, ebook, or audiobook formats. And if you enjoy the book, please spread the news far and wide, and leave it a good review on Goodreads, Amazon, and elsewhere!

He's Unmarked, She's Marked: my essay in Believe Me

Welcome to the third of four posts summarizing recent news about books that I have written and/or am otherwise included in. In this post, I want to talk about my contribution to the new Jessica Valenti & Jaclyn Friedman anthology Believe Me: How Trusting Women Can Change the World, which just came out a month or so ago.

During the height of the #MeToo movement in 2017-18, many people shared their personal stories of sexual harassment & assault using the hashtag #BelieveWomen, intended to highlight the fact that our accounts are often presumed to be dubious or outright untrue. This collection offers many insights into this problem while simultaneously expanding the discussion to include other marginalized groups and survivors of sexual assault. Lots of amazing writers and activists share their perspectives and strategies in this book, and I am very honored to be included amongst them!

When I was asked to contribute to this anthology, the first thing that ran through my mind was this: On past occasions when I have personally experienced sexual harassment or attempted date rapes, I wasn't worried so much that people wouldn't believe me because I am a woman. Rather, I thought that they would primarily dismiss my account due to the fact that I am transgender. And of course, this isn't a trans-specific issue. I've heard similar sentiments from sex workers, people of color, disabled people, and other LGBTQIA+ people. In fact, the accounts of all marginalized groups (including women) tend to be discounted or disbelieved to varying degrees, and it is even more so for individuals who are multiply marginalized.

on Jesse Singal, slut-shaming, and calling women "hysterical"

the Twitter poll I took regarding to this matter

I already told this story once before, in this piece, along with instances where Jesse Singal has purposefully lied about me, whipped up an online mob against me, and treated several other trans women with similar disrespect. I honestly want nothing more than for him to leave me the fuck alone—or at the very least, for him to only discuss my writings and positions, rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks. But he continues to harp about this, and spread lies about me. So here is a brief summary.

1) I regularly write about serious matters regarding transgender health and psychology. Jesse Singal disagrees with me on these matters, particularly with regards to the "80% desistance" statistic.

2) On July 25, 2016, Singal wrote a pro-"80% desistance" article, during which, in the midst of discussing my stance on this matter, he tossed in "as an aside, you should read her Daily Beast article about navigating the dating scene as a trans woman in San Francisco." That article had nothing to do with the topic at hand. And as I detail here, I know for a fact that Singal has read my work on sexualization and how it is an especially effective tool for invalidating trans women (the specific essay he read can be found here[PDF link]). So I presumed that he cited that dating piece in an attempt to purposefully slut-shame me.

Autogynephilia: a theory that ignores lived experiences and basic mathematics

I have probably written more about Ray Blanchard’s autogynephilia theory than all but a small handful of people. I have done so for multiple reasons: 1) as a scientist, I am appalled by the theory’s lack of scientific rigor, 2) it denies many trans people’s lived experiences, 3) it makes far too many unnecessary (and incorrect) assumptions (i.e., it ignores Occam’s razor), 4) it is not scientifically falsifiable, as exceptions to the theory are routinely dismissed as being due to “lying” or “misreporting” by trans subjects, 5) it needlessly sexualizes and stigmatizes people on the trans female/feminine spectrum, and 6) it does not even attempt to account for people on the trans male/masculine spectrum.

In this brief post, I will highlight several of my more thorough analyses of autogynephilia theory. Other writings related to this topic may be found on my Trans Psychology webpage.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Autogynephilia: A scientific review, feminist analysis, and alternative ‘embodiment fantasies’ model [PDF link]
In this 2020 peer-reviewed article, I provide an updated overview of the scientific case against autogynephilia. Following that, I forward an alternative "embodiment fantasies" model that explains all the available evidence better than autogynephilia theory, and is far more consistent with contemporary thinking regarding gender and sexual diversity. Finally, given the theory's recent popularity among trans-exclusionary feminists, I demonstrate how autogynephilia relies on essentialist, heteronormative, and male-centric presumptions about women and LGBTQ+ people, and as such, it is inconsistent with basic tenets of feminism. 

The Case Against Autogynephilia [PDF link]
An earlier peer-reviewed article (from 2010) that appeared in the International Journal of Transgenderism. In it, I provide my most detailed analysis of why autogynephilia theory's taxonomy (its two "subtypes") and etiology (the assertion that FEFs cause gender dysphoria and desire to transition in lesbian, bisexual, and asexual trans women) do not hold true. In addition to refuting the theory's main tenets, I forward simpler non-pathological alternative explanations that better account for Blanchard’s and other researchers' findings.

Autogynephilia Is a Flawed Framework for Understanding Female Embodiment Fantasies: A Response to Bailey and Hsu (2022) [PDF link]

This is my and Jaimie Veale's response to Bailey and Hsu's article How Autogynephilic Are Natal Females? (both published in Archives of Sexual Behavior). Their article attempts to refute the existence of “autogynephilia in women.” We point out numerous methodological and interpretive flaws with their study—including how their results are incompatible with Blanchard's original taxonomy—and make the case that “autogynephilia” is a flawed framework for considering both trans and cis women's sexual fantasies and desires.

OTHER RECENT ARTICLES

Making Sense of Autogynephilia Debates
My 2019 essay in which I briefly summarize the evidence against autogynephilia theory, then explain the main reasons why many trans women so strongly object to it (besides the fact that it is incorrect), and the numerous rationales and ideologies that lead some people to continue to support and promote the theory despite its lack of scientific validity.

Autogynephilia, Ad Hoc Hypotheses, and Handwaving
In this 2020 essay, I delve into several esoteric arguments that autogynephilia's proponents continue to forward in their attempts to resuscitate the theory. Most of the article addresses the questions: Do cisgender people truly experience “autogynephilia”/FEFs, and are FEFs capable of causing gender dysphoria in anyone? I end with a critique of the "Dregerian narrative" (the assertion that transgender activists are "attacking science").

Autogynephilia and Anti-Transgender Activism

This 2021 post chronicles anti-trans activists' increasing promotion of "autogynephilia" in their efforts to smear trans women en masse as "sexual predators." I also document their recent attempts to wield "autogynephilia" (often in tandem with the fake diagnosis "ROGD") to undermine trans-related healthcare more generally.

OLDER ESSAYS

Reconceptualizing “Autogynephilia” as Female/Feminine Embodiment Fantasies (FEFs)
A blogpost I wrote in 2015, and which was later updated for my latest book Outspoken (you can freely download that chapter here). This extends upon what I wrote in my 2007 book Whipping Girl, offering non-pathologizing explanations for why “autogyephilic fantasies” (what I call FEFs) exist, and why they are more prevalent in some trans subpopulations than others.

The real “autogynephilia deniers”
A blogpost I wrote in 2015 in response to James Cantor (one of the few proponents of autogynephilia theory who is still actively practicing sexology) wherein I list all of the major research and review articles that together demonstrate that the theory is incorrect. I also highlight numerous instances where anti-transgender individuals and organizations have cited autogynephilia theory in their attempts to invalidate, stigmatize, and slut-shame trans women.

Psychology, Sexualization and Trans-Invalidations [PDF link]
A speech that I gave in 2009; an updated version of the essay now appears in both my latest book Outspoken and on Academia.edu.  An accessible analysis of why there is so much focus on trans female/feminine people’s (real or presumed) sexualities in the lay public, media, and in the fields of psychology/sexology, while their trans male/masculine counterparts remain under-theorized in these regards. I discuss Blanchard’s autogynephilia theory in the context of these more foundational stereotypes and biases.

A Matter of Perspective: A Transsexual Woman-Centric Critique of Dreger’s ‘‘Scholarly History’’ of the Bailey Controversy [PDF link]

A recurring complaint made by autogynephilia's proponents is that trans women who oppose the theory must be "anti-science" and/or attempting to "ruin" scientists' careers. This narrative was popularized by Alice Dreger in her 2008 article "The Controversy Surrounding The Man Who Would Be Queen: A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age." This is my Archives of Sexual Behavior peer commentary in response to that article, in which I point out the numerous oversights and biases inherent in Dreger's narrative (which has since been repurposed numerous times).

Like I said, many other writings related to, or addressing, autogynephilia theory can be found on my Trans Psychology webpage and in my books Whipping Girl and Outspoken...

[note: If you appreciate my writings and want to see more, please consider supporting me on Patreon]

my Jesse Singal story

Note added March 16, 2021:

Back in late 2017, I wrote “my Jesse Singal story,” which was a 4,000-ish word essay about my experiences with him up to that point – that post remains intact below. Since then, there have been numerous developments that support and/or dovetail with points I made in my original piece. And since Singal recently dragged my name through the mud again, I thought it best to begin by briefly summarizing everything that has happened up to this point.

For those who don’t know me, I am an author and scientist who has written extensively about transgender people and issues, including trans healthcare and children. In 2016, for reasons unbeknownst to me, Singal took an interest in these latter topics, penning a series of articles – starting with How the Fight Over Transgender Kids Got a Leading Sex Researcher Fired through 2018’s When Children Say They’re Trans – that most of us familiar with these matters felt were heavily slanted, if not intentionally biased. Those links will take you to my immediate responses to those two pieces; even more critiques of these and his other trans-related articles can be found here.

There are lots of people who disagree with me about trans issues, but I don’t go around writing “stories” about them. Singal is the sole exception to this, the reason being, he is the only journalist I’ve ever encountered who has attacked me on a personal level. Specifically, after I penned a civil blogpost critiquing his first trans-related piece, he began publicly smearing me, as documented throughout this post. For those looking for a TL;DR, the main incidents (all described in more detail below) are:

Reconceptualizing “Autogynephilia” as Female/Feminine Embodiment Fantasies (FEFs)

[note added November, 2016: This essay (with additional material!) now appears as a chapter in my third book Outspoken: A Decade of Transgender Activism and Trans Feminism. If you want to read that updated chapter, it can be downloaded here]

Note added 7-14-15: a follow up post (of sorts) detailing all of the recent scientific papers demonstrating that Blanchard's theory is incorrect can be found in The Real "Autogynephilia" Deniers.

In 2010, two review articles appeared in the peer-review literature: My article The Case Against Autogynephilia was published in The International Journal of Transgenderism, and Charles Moser's article Blanchard's Autogynephilia Theory: A Critique appeared in the Journal of Homosexuality. Both of our papers presented numerous lines of evidence that disprove the main underpinnings of autogynephilia theory, namely, the assertions that trans female/feminine-spectrum people can be readily divided into two clear-cut categories based upon sexual orientation and the presence or absence of “autogynephilia,” and that “autogynephilia” is the primary underlying cause of gender dysphoria and desire to transition in trans women who experience it. (Note: subsequent analyses by Talia Bettcher and Jaimie Veale have further demonstrated that autogynephilia theory is incorrect.)

Where our papers differ is that, while Moser continues to use the term “autogynephilia” to refer to sexual fantasies and patterns of arousal in which the “thought or image of oneself as a woman” plays a contributing role, I instead argue that we should no longer use this term for the following reasons:

Final thoughts on that Michelle Goldberg article, faux journalism, and recognizing bias

So last week I briefly responded to a Michelle Goldberg article that had just appeared in The New Yorker magazine called “What Is a Woman? The dispute between radical feminism and transgenderism.” It was a piece that I was interviewed for, and felt misrepresented by. It was also a piece that many people (including myself) felt had a strong anti-transgender bias (see critical reviews from Bitch Magazine, Autostraddle, Bilerico, The Slantist, New Statesman, and Columbia Journalism Review).

Three days ago, my formal response to Goldberg’s article was published as an op-ed on The Advocate. It is entitled “An Open Letter to The New Yorker.” Rather than merely listing all my grievances with Goldberg’s piece (many of which have been addressed in the critical reviews listed above, and a few more will be described in this post), I talk more generally about what it was like for me (behind the scenes, if you will) to be a long-time activist within a marginalized community, and to have a mainstream journalist swoop in and cover really complicated issues, only to oversimplify and misrepresent them in a manner that mainstream audiences will find “titillating” and misperceive as “balanced.”

two articles (plus thoughts on autogynephilia as the transgender equivalent of slut-shaming)

note added 9-1-14 regarding point #2 in this post: The following week I had a chance to more thoughtfully and extensively reply to that Michelle Goldberg article. The Advocate ran my op-ed entitled “An Open Letter to The New Yorker," which is my formal response to the article. Following that, I published a blogpost called Final thoughts on that Michelle Goldberg article, faux journalism, and recognizing bias, which linked to other critical reviews of the Goldberg article and includes my closing thoughts on the matter.

Two things happened today:

1) I have a new article out on Ms. Magazine blog today called Empowering Femininity, wherein I revisit some of the ideas I initially forwarded in the chapter of Whipping Girl called "Putting the Feminine Back into Feminism." Check it out!

2) Some of you may be aware of a New Yorker article by Michelle Goldberg that came out today entitled "What Is a Woman? The dispute between radical feminism and transgenderism." It is basically about how Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminists (TERFs) are increasingly becoming marginalized within feminism, and it is mostly written from their perspective (e.g., about ways in which they have been personally attacked or "censored" by trans activists). Let's just say that it is not the piece that I would have written on the matter.

I do not have the time or energy to write a formal response to the entire piece, but since I am one of the few trans voices included in the article, I feel compelled to make a few points "for the record" as it were:

update on debunking psychiatric theories/diagnoses on trans people

So I *finally* got around to updating my webpage Debunking Psychological Diagnoses and Theories about Transsexual and Transgender People today. It includes PDF links to my article The Case Against Autogynephilia, a recently published article on the DSM expansion of Transvestic Disorder, and two still-somewhat-newish pieces about how the "Fetish Concept" hurts both trans folks and our partners.

You can check out the updated page here: http://www.juliaserano.com/TSetiology.html

In Defense of Partners

[note added January, 2017: This essay now appears as a chapter in my third book Outspoken: A Decade of Transgender Activism and Trans Feminism]

This last weekend, I finally got around to reading Janet Mock’s recent essay How Society Shames Men DatingTrans Women & How This Affects Our Lives (note: there is also an excellent interview that includes her and Laverne Cox on HuffPost Live discussing the same issue). Mock wrote the piece in response to the media coverage and public backlash against DJ Mister Cee (a cisgender male hip-hop artist and radio personality) for his attempt to solicit sex from someone who he thought was a trans woman. Mock’s piece rightfully points out how the public’s shaming of men who are attracted to trans women—e.g., by insulting their manhood, or presuming that they are closeted gay men—undermines our identities too, as the underlying assumption is that we must be “fake women” or “really men.”

A “Transsexual Versus Transgender” Intervention*

[note added January, 2017: This essay now appears as a chapter in my third book Outspoken: A Decade of Transgender Activism and Trans Feminism]

Over the last year or so, I have read a number of blog entries and Facebook rants about the so-called “transsexual versus transgender” issue. For those who are unaware of this debate, it stems from a subset of transsexuals who feel that the transsexual community is not served well by being included under the transgender umbrella (some even go so far as to insist that there is a mutually-exclusive dichotomy between transsexual and transgender people). Along similar lines, these transsexuals also argue that inclusion under the LGBT umbrella does a disservice to the transsexual community, as it conflates two very different issues (i.e., sexual orientation and gender identity), and emboldens many cissexual LGB folks to appropriate trans identities and experiences, and to claim to speak on our behalf.

I have purposefully tried to avoid entering into this debate, primarily because many (albeit certainly not all) of the umbrella critiques that I have read invoke horrible stereotypes, and sometimes even hate speech, to help bolster their case. I have seen blatantly homophobic and biphobic remarks made by some anti-umbrella advocates. One post I saw described bisexuals as sexual predators who fetishize and prey upon transsexuals - this comment draws on a long history of monosexist stereotypes of bisexuals as “sex crazed” and desiring “anything that moves,” and it deeply offended me as a bisexual trans woman.

Honey Money

A friend passed this onto me:

"Catherine Hakim: charm school marm – interview"

This has got to be the funniest book review-slash-interview that I have ever read. It totally titilated my erotic capital... ; )

Why feminists should be concerned with the impending revision of the DSM

Originally posted on LJ 5-6-09

FYI, I just posted a piece called Why feminists should be concerned with the impending revision of the DSM over at Feministing.com. It's mostly about Ray Blanchard's suggestions to revise the Paraphilia section. Feel free to check it out if you're interested... j.

Am I the only person offended by this?

Originally posted on LJ 2-12-09

ok, so the following is a rant that I posted on a trans-themed email list. It is in reference an exposé written by folks within the gender variant community about a proponent of autogynephilia theory who happens to be a trans woman. Now this person has said some messed up things about people I respect, and she is accused of a number of other things which I have heard second hand that, if true, are very disturbing. Having said that, I wrote the following post in response to certain aspects of that exposé that really really bothered me as a trans woman and activist. For anonymity reasons, I have omitted/deleted names of the person in question, as well as those who published the exposé. I ask those who wish to leave comments to respect this anonymity...

Am I the only person offended by this?

If I were teaching a course on intersectionality...

originally posted on LJ 11-29-08

...I would assign this article for my students to deconstruct.

One gets the impression that the SF Weekly felt that transgender women, sex work and “illegal immigration” are not “sexy” enough subjects on their own to spark public outrage. So instead, they decided to sensationalize all three simultaneously. What "edgy" journalism...

I'd post some of the pics that accompany the piece, or quote some of the more racist, transmisogynistic and sexualizing passages therein, but it would just make me mad... -j.

Whipping Girl FAQ: "Submissive Streak"

Originally posted on LJ 8-22-08
In this, the third in a line of posts that address some of the more frequently asked questions I’ve received about Whipping Girl (WG), I want to talk about chapter 15: “Submissive Streak.” I’ve found that that’s been the most “polarizing” chapter in the book, in that lots of people have told me it was their favorite chapter, while others have told me that it was the one chapter in the book that they were bothered by or didn’t like.

Fuck me HBO

Originally posted on LJ 7-4-08

OK, so i'm wiped out from packing all day (as i'm about to move), so i pour myself a glass of wine and i'm flicking thru the channels and i stop on an hbo channel that has taxi cab confessions, which i've never seen before. and i'm sure that they've had many episodes about all sorts of different things. but of course the one time i tune in is a scene where a guy is with his trans girlfriend, and he's bragging about how he's straight and not gay, and she's going off about how she doesn't see herself as a woman because she can't bare babies, and the cab driver is asking her about sex change surgeries, and she's sharing with him all of her friends' worst case scenarios, and i just wanna fucking kick the tv in. but i won't, because it's my fucking tv, and i'd end up having to buy a new one.