Male-to-female transsexual subtypes: Sexual arousal with cross-dressing and physical measurements
Article Outline
In our article “Transsexual subtypes: clinical and theoretical significance” (Smith et al., 2005) we have chosen to use self-reported sexual preference to classify the participants in our study as homosexuals or nonhomosexuals. We did so because, in the general population, marital status is not the best indicator of sexual orientation, and having (had) male or female sexual partners describes someone's sexual behavior, but not necessarily feelings of erotic attraction. However, it is conceivable that our participants, consciously or unconsciously, have over-reported a ‘homosexual' orientation, because it was more in accordance with the general notion that MF transsexuals are ‘real' women (thus attracted to men), trapped in a man's body or because they feared that they would not be eligible for sex reassignment if they reported the ‘wrong' sexual orientation. So, when Dr. Lawrence contacted us and suggested a re-categorization of the transsexual subtypes based on these two items, we were interested and therefore performed the additional analyses.
She hypothesized that many of the homosexual male-to-female (MF) transsexuals in our study who had been married or who reported having had female sexual partners probably were not genuinely homosexual. In her view, they might have been disproportionately represented among the ‘homosexual' MF participants who reported sexual arousal with cross-dressing, especially at higher frequencies of arousal. Furthermore, she hypothesized that re-categorizing the MF participants might result in support for the finding of Blanchard and colleagues that homosexual MF transsexuals were shorter, lighter and had a lower body mass index than nonhomosexual MF transsexuals (Blanchard et al., 1995). By analysing the data of the newly categorized homosexual versus nonhomosexual MF transsexuals we found support for her first hypothesis. Although both the original the new homosexual subgroups reported less sexual arousal with cross-dressing than the nonhomosexual group, we found less sexual arousal during cross-dressing in the newly categorized homosexual subgroup as compared with the original homosexual group. Dr. Lawrence's second hypothesis with regard to height, weight, and body mass index was not confirmed.
One may wonder to what extent the new categorization resulted in a “truly homosexual" group. After all, like as among non-transsexual homosexuals, a previous marriage and/or sexual activity with female partners may also occur among transsexual homosexuals.
For the purpose of this study–a comparison between subtypes of transsexuals — and within the limits of our material, self-reported sexual orientation — our original categorization seems justified. A reanalysis of our main findings, based on the new categorization of the subgroups, did not result in different outcomes.
References
PII: S0165-1781(07)00201-6
doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2007.06.019
© 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
