Queer, Intersections With Trans

Basic Definitions

Trans individuals, like cisgender (cis) individuals, may have a myriad of sexual identities and orientations. The present entry focuses directly on trans individuals who do not identify as heterosexual. Explicitly, these individuals sit at the intersection of gender and sexual minority identities and are thus marginalized at this specific intersection. These individuals may find support as well as tension from both the trans and the LGBQIA+ communities. Furthermore, although these individuals exist within and identify with both communities, it is important not to conflate the gender and [Page 672]sexual minority communities. Instead, this encyclopedia entry acknowledges gender and sexual minority identities as two separate yet interacting constructs that affect not only LGBQIA+ trans individuals but also individuals of any gender and sexual configuration.

Historical Context

Throughout the history of conceptualizing LGBQIA+ trans individuals, many have sought (whether intentionally or unintentionally) to erase the experiences of trans individuals who were sexually and romantically attracted to the same gender as their affirmed gender. One of the approaches that has worked to further this erasure is the autogynephilia movement. Conceptualized by Blanchard, autogynephilia refers to a classification of transfeminine individuals who were deemed to be “heterosexual fetishistic transvestites,” or transfeminine individuals who were romantically and sexually attracted to other women. This label pushed the idea that trans women were sexual fetishists and that lesbian trans women were not actually attracted to other women but were attracted to the idea of themselves as women. As there is little empirical basis for this classification, the autogynephilia label underscores the underlying biases and assumptions that lay the foundations of the theory itself.

Intersections of LGBQIA+ and Trans Identity

According to the U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS) conducted in 2015, less than 18% of trans individuals identify as straight or heterosexual. Even so, the majority of research that focuses on the sexual and romantic relationships of trans individuals assumes that most people within this population identify as heterosexual. As results from the USTS show, the assumption that most trans individuals are heterosexual is not only incorrect but also erases the experiences of nonbinary trans individuals. This erasure, intentional or not, is due to the fact that heterosexuality implies a binary gender dichotomy, something that nonbinary individuals may not identify with or see as relevant to them. Like cis individuals, trans individuals’ sexualities vary, although limited empirical research acknowledges or explores this variability. Scholarship in the area of trans individuals’ sexual identities and romantic relationships primarily focuses on the cis partners of trans individuals.

Furthermore, trans individuals’ sexualities may have relationship configurations and sexual power dynamics that are more fluid than those of cis individuals. Focusing explicitly and singularly on the biological sex of the individuals involved in these intimate relationships may render some of them to be illogical. For example, a trans man sexually and romantically attracted to women is not to be categorized as a lesbian, as those scholars who focus only on biological sex would seek to categorize him. Furthermore, power dynamics may play a role with trans individuals who choose to partner with cis individuals. As with any relationship in which one partner holds a minority identity while the other does not, experiences of these couples may show a societal power dynamic in which the cis partner inherently enjoys more systematic benefits than the trans partner does. Thus, negotiations in relationship dynamics, such as division of labor, disclosing trans or sexual minority identities, or sexual intimacy, are all dynamics that must be navigated within the relationship. Furthermore, LGBQIA+ trans individuals may experience rejection from the sexual minority communities that they are a part of, owing in part to experiences of biological essentialism and distilling trans individuals down to their genitals instead of their gender identities.

...