If the title baffles you, it means you’re not a fan of P. G. Wodehouse — probably Britain’s best comic writer of the 20th century, and most definitely its most prolific writer (he wrote almost a hundred novels!). Ironically, I just stumbled across him some years ago on Project Gutenberg — many of his writings are now on the public domain — but once I found Wodehouse, I couldn’t stop until I readÂ
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
âś“ Live Streamingâś“ Interactive Chatâś“ Private Showsâś“ HD Qualityâś“ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Crossdreaming: Its Transphobic Roots, and Current Transphobic, Cissexist Content
Crossdreaming is a relatively new term created by Jack Molay. Jack Molay is person who was assigned male at birth, and currently identifies as a man who dreams about having a female body.Â
“There are men (like me) that fantasize about having a woman's body and get sexually aroused by this.” [1]
"It is more than a little confusing, because -- even if I cannot for my life think of having sex with a man as a man -- my female self has no such scruples”
Jack Molay is a cisgender man. With the use of his website it is also easy enough to deduce that he is white, and heterosexual. To make this clear, he is a white cisgender heterosexual man who writes primarily about transgender, and transsexual issues. It is clear to any transsexual, or transgender woman that his narrative is different from our similar yet still varied backgrounds.
Now then, onto the theory.
Crossdreaming is based on Ray Blanchard's theory of autogynephillia. Blanchard's theory is a theory which forwards that late (after childhood) transitioners who are not attracted to men are not real transsexuals but men with a paraphillic mental disorder. If you need more information I suggest using Google to look up the term. It is not supported by the accepted standards of care for transsexual people, is rejected by the transgender community, and not accepted by both the American Psychiatric Association, and American Psychological Association. Many in the psychological community have discredited Blanchard's work and his theory is regard as junk science.
Beyond Blanchard, Jack Molay likes to quote Anne Lawarance, a supporter of Blanchard's work, to describe autogynephillia. To see why this is a problem reference the above paragraph.
Julia Serano, in her The Case Against Autogynephilia, had this to say about the theory:
"...there were flaws in Blanchard's original papers, including that they were conducted among overlapping populations primarily at the Clarke Institute in Toronto without nontranssexual controls, that the subtypes were not empirically derived but instead were "begging the question that transsexuals fall into subtypes based on their sexual orientation," and that further research had found that a non-deterministic correlation between cross-gender arousal and sexual orientation. She said that Blanchard did not discuss the idea that cross-gender arousal may be an effect, rather than a cause, of gender dysphoria, and that Blanchard assumed that correlation implied causation. Serano also stated that the wider idea of cross-gender arousal was affected by the prominence of sexual objectification of women, accounting for both a relative lack of cross-gender arousal in transsexual men and similar patterns of gynephilic arousal in non-transsexual women. [2]
Serano also criticised proponents of the theory, claiming that they dismiss non-autogynephilic, non-androphilic transsexuals as misreporting or lying while not questioning androphilic transsexuals, describing it as:
 "tantamount to hand-picking which evidence counts and which does not based upon how well it conforms to the model" [2]
The article at Wikipedia also had this to say in an a summation of Serano's criticism:
Further criticisms alleged that the theory undermined lived experience of transsexual women, contributed to pathologisation and sexualisation of transsexual women, and the literature itself fed into the stereotype of transsexuals as "purposefully deceptive", which could be used to justify discrimination and violence against transsexuals. [3]
You can read the entire paper at provided citation. Suffice it to say that noted trans woman, and activist Julia Serano does not agree with the theory of autogynephillia.
Originally Jack stated:
“Again: the reason I have found the term so useful, is because I recognize my own life in these descriptions. That does not mean that I necessarily [sic] will accept the theories that lies behind these terms.”
He later noted he no longer supports the term autogynephillia, but that has not deterred him from using it as the basis of his theory of crossdreamers. That's correct his theory is rooted in a poorly regarded transphobic and cissexist theory.
If Jack Molay wanted to solely claim this identity for himself and other men like himself who fantasize about having a woman’s body for the purposes of sex many of trans people and I would probably not care. The issue is that he continually attempts to redefine transgender, and transsexual narratives from a cisgender and heterosexual perspective with a junk theory that has historically oppressed trans women. All while simultaneously using problematic language such as:
transgendered
I find it hard to understand transgenderism without the sex.
the fact that transgendered men get sexually aroused by imagining themselves with a female body is pretty obvious
I mean, look at "genuine girls" biological women
most genuine XX girls (natal women)
why the idea that M2F transgendered fantasizing about being womenÂ
There is no denying that something has gone wrong in the lives of male to female transsexuals (also called "transwomen"), She is after all trapped in a man's body, even if her personality may be sound. [3]
At this point it should be evident that Jack Molay is not in touch with the transgender community. He does not understand us, and does not understand what we find offensive. If it’s not apparent, let me break it down for you.
Transgendered
See: beckdrop's explanation
I find it hard to understand transgenderism without the sex.
He can’t imagine being a trans person without sex. This shows a fundamental lack of understanding in how being trans is about far more than just sex.
the fact that transgendered men get sexually aroused by imagining themselves with a female body is pretty obvious
Using the term “transgendered men” to mean trans women should be obvious as to why it is offensive. Not to mention his reinforcement that our bodies are not somehow already female.
I mean, look at "genuine girls" biological women
most genuine XX girls (natal women)
Despite crossing out and having used scare quotes around genuine girls, biological women is hardly any better and still comes from a place of cissexism. The same goes for his use of XX, and “natal” women. To see a more in depth explanation on this please see this post  of mine.
There is no denying that something has gone wrong in the lives of male to female transsexuals (also called "transwomen"), She is after all trapped in a man's body, even if her personality may be sound.
Using MTF transsexual while using both scare quotes on an incorrect form of trans women is also mildly cissexist in that it fails to explicitly just call us women.
To summarize, Jack is writing from a cissexist perspective and coopting a history of transsexualism imposed on us by cis doctors. He uses offensive terminology, and repeatedly makes it clear that he is not part of our community with phrases like “So why the idea that M2F transgendered fantasizing about being women get aroused should be offensive, I don't know. It is a sad fact, though, that the medical establishment used to frown upon these things, and that M2F transgendered kept quiet about it. They often pretended to be sexless women trapped in a sexless man's body.” In which he uses they and refers to us an outside group.
Perhaps what angers me even more that his use offensive terminology is his coercive inclusion of trans people into this theory. At what point Jack Molay decided to make crossdreaming supersede identities under the transgender umbrella I do not know. However all of his recent blog posting include transsexuals and other transgender identities as a subset of crossdreamers or forces cisgender identities into transgender identities. This is both highly offensive and wrong. His work continues to present itself in a cissexist manner and is an obvious appropriation of the transsexual and transgender narrative.Particularly the oppression of trans women. At best he is appropriating the theory of transgender activists for a cisgender fetish, and at worst he is appropriating to establish and monetize a theory of the behavior of cisgender and cissexual persons' sexuality. Regardless crossdreaming is just as transphobic and cissexist as the theory that it is based.