On WPATH and the Eunuch Archives

In 2021 WPATH issued a draft of the next revision of its standards of care (SOC8). For the first time, this included a chapter named 'Eunuch'. In essence WPATH asserts that some men who wish to have their testicles removed or rendered non-functional have a 'eunuch' gender identity, and should in some circumstances be helped to alter their bodies to match this identity. WPATH states the following (p. 326-328):

"[T]he identity of eunuch is a gender identity of its own and for many it is the sole identity with no other gender or transgender affiliation".

"[I]ndividuals who identify as eunuchs ... may be said to have Male-to-Eunuch (MtE) gender dysphoria".

"[H]ealth professionals should offer medical and surgical intervention to eunuch identified individuals when there is a high risk that withholding treatment will cause individuals harm through self-surgery, surgery by unqualified practitioners, or unsupervised use of medications that affect hormones".

Genevieve Gluck has done extensive research into the links between WPATH and two academics specialising in men who fantasise about castration, Thomas W Johnson and Richard J Wassersug. Of the papers cited in the references section of the 'Eunuch' chapter, Johnson is an author of 16, and Wassersug of 18. Gluck has discovered that Johnson (AKA 'Jesus') and Wassersug (AKA 'Eunuchunique') are key members of the Eunuch Archives online community. This website hosts a large collection of fictional narratives about genital mutilation, nearly 4000 of which involve depictions of minors.

Alarmed by Gluck's findings, I decided to have a look at some of Johnson and Wassersug's research. I found two papers particularly interesting: 'Differences in the psychological, sexual, and childhood experiences among men with extreme interests in voluntary castration' by Wong, Wassersug, Johnson and Wibowo (2020), and 'Castration for pleasure: exploring extreme castration ideations in fiction' by Piccolo, Johnson and Wassersug (2022). The former is based on a survey of Eunuch Archives users, while the latter is an analysis of the 100 most highly rated stories hosted by the Eunuch Archives.

Wong et al. used a modified version of the Zurich Xenomelia Scale, which measures amputation desire in physically healthy individuals, to assess respondents' 'erotic attraction' to the idea of castration. Compared to those respondents with an ostensibly purely academic interest in the subject, "erotic attraction to castration was higher" in all other respondents, including those who had actually been castrated (and who might be presumed to be more likely to assert a 'eunuch' identity). The authors state: "This finding aligns with the paraphilic nature of extreme castration ideation within EA stories".

According to Piccolo et al., "we found sexual acts in 93% of the top-rated stories", while 68% featured "[a]ssault of an unconsenting person (including forced or coerced castration and rape)". Furthermore, 26% of the stories demonstrate "ephebophilia: sexual preference for individuals in mid-to-late adolescence, typically ages 15-19", while 16% show "hebephilia: sexual preference for early adolescent children (those roughly ages 11 to 14)".

On the basis of Johnson and Wassersug's own research, then, it is clear that castration fantasies often have a fetishistic quality, and that sadomasochistic themes and a focus on pubescent males are common elements in these fantasies.

If even Johnson and Wassersug acknowledge the fetishistic nature of castration fantasies, why is an attempt being made to legitimise the concept of a 'eunuch' gender identity? On the one hand, for many people fetishism carries negative connotations. It is associated with shamefulness, weakness, dangerousness. Healthcare systems are unlikely to fund body modifications for fetishists, even though doing so might improve quality of life. Therefore, from a strategic point of view it is obvious why individuals who desire castration would seek to rebrand themselves in terms of the fashionable new concept of gender identity. It is perhaps for this reason that the 'Eunuch' chapter of the WPATH SOC8 draft completely fails to mention the established association between castration fantasies and sexual excitement.

On the other hand, I think something much darker may be going on here. Given what we know about the association between castration fantasies, sadomasochism, and ephebophilia / hebephilia, it seems self-evident that such fantasies are likely to reflect youthful experiences of powerlessness and sexual threat. Indeed, Wong et al. state that "childhood trauma (emotional and/or sexual) may play a role in castration interests for some individuals. This is congruent with the past literature on the association between childhood trauma and deviant sexual interests and fantasies". According to another article, "Several of our participants reported that their mothers had held a knife or scissors to their penis and threatened to cut it off after finding them masturbating. One respondent wrote a long account of being held by his father while his uncle pulled down his pants, held a knife to his scrotum, and offered to castrate him just like the pigs he had been watching them castrate" (Jackowich, Vale, Vale, Wassersug and Johnson, 'Voluntary genital ablations: contrasting the cutters and their clients', 2014).

Piccolo et al. draw attention to the preponderance of victim narratives in the Eunuch Archives stories, noting that "the story perspective is overwhelmingly that of someone ... being castrated, rather than castrating others". They assert that the stories reflect "the authors' fantasies about being the submissive victim to a castrator ... an important part of the fantasy was not only physical brutalization but also passivity, helplessness, and lack of responsibility for the abuse and its outcome". The possibility that some of these fantasies may recapitulate actual childhood abuse is obvious.

While it may be true that castration fantasies tend to feature narratives of victimhood, something I learned in my own therapy is that when one fantasises about an act, all the characters in the fantasy are created by oneself, and are therefore parts of oneself. Thus, someone who fantasises about being raped in some sense also fantasises about being a rapist. A person who imagines themselves raping, to an extent also imagines being raped. Therefore we must assume that men who fantasise about being castrated are to a degree excited by the idea of castrating others (possibly minors, possibly by force); this idea forms part of the latent, if not the overt content of the fantasy.

We all know that unacknowledged sexual urges tend to find ways of expressing themselves without our being consciously aware of it. It follows that individuals with castration fantasies need to come to terms with the part of themselves which is excited by the idea of castrating others, in order to prevent it from influencing their behaviour.

The facts are these. Two academics whose work underpins the 'Eunuch' chapter of the SOC8 draft appear to be deeply embedded in the subculture of men who fantasise about castration. WPATH advocates for the chemical castration of pubescent males. The SOC8 draft states (p. 71-78):

"The use of puberty-blocking medications, such as GnRH analogue, is not recommended until children have achieved a minimum of Tanner stage 2 of puberty [i.e. around age 11 for boys]".

"We recommend that health professionals assessing trans and gender diverse adolescents should only recommend gender affirming medical or surgical treatments requested by the patient when [the adolescent has reached the age of] 17 and above for ... metoidioplasty, orchidectomy, vaginoplasty, and hysterectomy".

Is it unreasonable to wonder whether, at some level, the unacknowledged sexual urges of men who fantasise about castration are finding expression via Johnson and Wassersug's engagement with WPATH? In my view, one of the factors supporting this interpretation is that, as far as I can see, despite publishing extensively on men who fantasise about castration, Johnson and Wassersug have never publicly acknowledged their participation in the Eunuch Archives community, a participation which presumably reflects their personal sexual interests. If these academics are capable of overlooking the obvious ethical and interpretive implications of failing to declare their personal investment in the subject of their research, what other blind spots might they have?

In summary, I am not one of those who believe individuals should be shamed for their sexual interests. I do not agree that those with violent and cruel sexual fantasies are necessarily any more likely to commit abhorrent acts. However, I do believe that such sexual urges need careful and conscientious management, in order to avoid actual harm from occurring. In the present moment, increasing numbers of boys and young men are being chemically and surgically castrated in the name of 'gender identity'. The possibility that this increase is being driven to some extent by unacknowledged adult sexual desires, albeit themselves resulting from childhood trauma, is one which should concern us all.

Genevieve Gluck's original research on this subject:

Castrating children in the service of male sexuality

Top trans medical association collaborated with castration, child abuse fetishists

Top academic behind fetish site hosting child sexual abuse fantasy, push to revise WPATH guidelines

The truth about castration fetishes & puberty blockers with Genevieve Gluck

WPATH and the Eunuch Archives

The dark history of "transgender medicine", WPATH & child castration w/ Genevieve Gluck

A presentation by Thomas W Johnson can be found here:

Beyond the binary: gender dysphoria & gender identity