Topics Sex

Question Being a transvestite all my life I have wrestled with the reasons why I have this need and, essentially, compulsion. Some seem to argue that transvestism has a organic origin while others say it is developmental in some way. I would appreciate constructive views on this.

Accepted:
October 19, 2008

Comments

I tend to doubt that the correct answer to your question will come from philosophy, as opposed to psychology or neuroscience. But I would pose back to you a philosophical question: Why would it matter to you whether it is organic or developmental? Either way, you are what you are, and I see no reason to think that there is any fault here no matter what the process was that led to your being the way you are.

Maybe I have misunderstood what lies behind your question, and if so I apologize. But it sounds to me like you feel you need an excuse or explanation to "explain away" your difference. If so, I disagree. Just be who you are and be prudent about foolish and prejudiced people who might respond to you in ways you would rather avoid.

I'm not sure that the questioner is seeking an excuse or explanation to "explain away" the condition. The words "wrestled" and "compulsion" suggest some psychic pain about the questioner's transvestism. If that is so, the pop-psychological advice to "be who you are," to accept yourself in the face of the negative assessments other people make about the condition, is short-sighted. According to the American Psychiatric Association (see DSM-IV [1994] and DSM-IV-TR [2000]), "fetishistic transvestism" is a sexual mental disorder if the condition [the sexual desires, in part] is accompanied by psychic pain (or, which we can ignore for our discussion, functional impairment). The goal of therapy is to cure the patient by eliminating the psychic pain/distress (this is a modification of the medical model of physical ailments). This elimination, however, can be sought and/or attained in two very different ways. The root problem is a conflict between the patient's desires and the patient's own negative belief-dependent assessment of the condition. One solution (or attempted therapy) is to attenuate the psychic pain by eliminating, if possible, the desires, leaving the personal assessment intact. This re-integration of the personality should relieve the psychic pain. The alternative solution (or therapy) is to leave the desire structure intact but to alter, if possible, the patient's own negative assessment of his/her condition. Again, the re-integration of the personality should bring relief. In both cases, relief from psychic pain marks the "cure," and the person is no longer sexually mentally disordered. Which therapy is the best bet will be determined, on a case-by-case basis, by whether the desires are more easily changed or the belief system that gives rise to the negative self-assessment is more easily changed (or even, which of the two--the desires or the assessment--the patient would prefer to try to change). Nicholas rather nonchalantly opts for the second therapeutic intervention. Sure, that's the PC/liberal response to this sort of psychological problem. But ask yourself, seriously, whether it makes sense (ever, at all, mostly, or always) to think that it is easier to change one's belief system than one's desire structure. Nicholas tells you to accept yourself. If only you could follow his advice by snapping your fingers. Notice that whether the condition is "organic or developmental" may, after all, bear on these questions about therapeutic efficacy.