Abstract

Cisgender men have increasingly come out with stories about their intimate relationships with transgender women. However, studies on relationships between cis and trans persons have argued that trans women are critical of trans-attracted cis men. This comes from the accusation that many cisgender men fetishize transgender women. Trans-fetishization is used in this study as the fetishizing of trans women by cis men who overvalue the trans women’s transness. The exploration of trans-fetishization is done in context of committed relationships between cis men and trans women, and highlights the perspectives of cis men in the relationships. Through an analysis of the accounts shared by Filipino men in a voiced online interview, the author analyzes how fetishism may be explored in (1) the men’s motivations for entering a committed relationship, (2) their concept of an ideal woman, (3) the strategies they employ to maintain high-level of commitment, (4) and their compliance or resistance to hegemonic masculinity. The analysis reveals that men commit to relationships based on the reasons, sometimes overlapping, of material benefits, need for companionship, and the desire to move on from the dating phase by formalizing the relationship. Transness has not been a major factor and therefore, trans-fetishization cannot be accused in this context. Analysis also reveals that men were not attracted to their trans partners because of their transness, instead, their trans partners embody physical and non- physical traits similar to the men’s standard for an “ideal woman.” Using the investment model (Rusbult and Buunk 1993), the level of commitment of the relationships was assessed. It shows that there is a high level of commitment among the men based on satisfaction level, lack of quality alternatives, and investment of resources. Commitment in the relationships are also maintained by heteronormativity and transnormativity. Adherence to these normativities provides the author basis to assert that transness is not fetishized as an overvalued object of sexual desire. In the context of heteronormativity and cisnormativity, what may be argued as the fetish object is the adherence of the trans partners to the feminine norms. Finally, analysis shows that men, in diverse ways, comply with and resist hegemonic masculinity (Connell 1987, reformulated 2005) and thus undermines the accusation of trans-fetishization. At the most, the transness of their partners may only be negotiated against hegemonic masculinity. Future endeavors in this scope include an investigation of relationships between partners of different nationalities, as well as an exploration of non-monogamous and/or non-heterosexual cis-trans relationships.