This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
Some authors have questioned the strength of Moser’s research, including Lawrence (2017). Although a full debate on autogynephilia is unnecessary (it suffices for my argument that there exist serious critiques and alternative explanations), I must admit that I do not find her rebuttal convincing. The limitations she highlights do not seem to be sufficiently specific to shed doubt on the conclusion that cisgender women also experience autogynephilia, and some of them also apply to the original research supporting sexual orientation divisions among transgender women.
References
Bailey, J. M. (2019). How to ruin sex research [Guest Editorial]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(4), 1007–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1420-y.
Bettcher, T. M. (2014). When selves have sex: What the phenomenology of trans sexuality can teach about sexual orientation. Journal of Homosexuality, 61(5), 605–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2014.865472.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066.
Hsu, K. J., Rosenthal, A. M., Miller, D. I., & Bailey, J. M. (2016). Who are gynandromorphophilic men? Characterizing men with sexual interest in transgender women. Psychological Medicine, 46(4), 819–827. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002317.
Lawrence, A. A. (2017). Autogynephilia and the typology of male-to-female transsexualism: Concepts and controversies. European Psychologist, 22(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000276.
Lewis, P. J. (n.d.). Interpretations of quantum mechanics. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved June 11, 2019 from https://www.iep.utm.edu/int-qm/.
Moser, C. (2009). Autogynephilia in women. Journal of Homosexuality, 56(5), 539–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918360903005212.
Moser, C. (2010). Blanchard’s autogynephilia theory: A critique. Journal of Homosexuality, 57(6), 790–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2010.486241.
Rind, B. (2019). Sexual science versus progressive advocacy: The need for resistance [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01475-2.
Serano, J. M. (2010). The case against autogynephilia. International Journal of Transgenderism, 12(3), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2010.514223.
Teo, T. (2010). What is epistemological violence in the empirical social sciences? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(5), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00265.x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ashley, F. Science Has Always Been Ideological, You Just Don’t See It. Arch Sex Behav 48, 1655–1657 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01519-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01519-7