360° Analysis

The Wonderful and Confusing World of Girlfags and Guydykes


© Shutterstock

April 16, 2015 15:59 EDT

Given the wide-ranging types of human sexuality, the binary gender model is no longer viable.

My first boyfriend, in the eighth grade, turned out to be gay. So did my second, and my third. By the time — at 19 — I finally succeeded in hooking up with a straight man, I was so relieved to be with someone who was actually attracted to me that I married him. However, I continued to fantasize about men with men throughout our 13 years of marriage. As I write this a few decades later, I’m married to a bisexual guy whose romantic liaisons have primarily been with lesbians.

Welcome to the wonderful, and often confusing, world of the girlfag and guydyke.

The word “girlfag” was invented by Jill Nagle in a 2003 article in BUST Magazine (“Manly, Yes, But I Like It Too: The Life and Loves of a Girlfag”). Nobody knows who invented “guydyke,” but it seems to have been coined a year or two later. Most members of the English-speaking girlfag/guydyke community are less than thrilled with the terminologies, which began in an era when many minorities were actively seeking to reclaim potentially negative words (as in Dan Savage’s “Hey Faggot!” column). As of this writing, though, nobody has yet come up with a viable English synonym for “girlfag,” although “male lesbian” for “guydyke” has achieved some currency.

Terminology notwithstanding, girlfag and guydyke identities are a subject of increasing awareness. A growing group of men and women are discovering that they identify with LGBT culture and understand themselves as ineluctably queer, and are drawn erotically and culturally to gay people of another gender.

Flexible Gender

Although the identity is new, the reality of the girlfag predates contemporary notions of flexible gender by at least centuries. Mary Renault, for example, wrote homoerotic novels on Greek and Roman history that inspired several generations of gay men; Renault had a lifelong female partner but was unapologetic about her attraction to male/male sexuality. Before her, Amantine-Arore-Lucile Dupin — better known as George Sand — often dressed as a man and formed erotic attachments to effeminate men such as Frédéric Chopin. We have no way of knowing how many other women fit into this specialized niche of gender and orientation, as only the famous few have come down to us via the written word.

Today’s girlfag might express her erotic self by reading or writing “slash” fiction (a predominantly woman-created and consumed genre in which men from popular culture have gay sex together — the word “slash” derives from the virgule in “Kirk/Spock” — one of the first recognized pairings in the field). She might consume yaoi, a form of Japanese hentai comic in which two beautiful boys become lovers. She might or might not present as masculine-of-center.

© Shutterstock

© Shutterstock

I do, but some other girlfags think of themselves as “female drag queens” and love dressing in hyper feminine clothing. She might or might not be a “fag hag” — a woman who enjoys the company and culture of gay men without necessarily thinking of herself as one of them or wanting to have sex with them.

Meanwhile, what is her guydyke colleague up to? He might be consuming female/female porn — but unlike his straight brethren, he’ll be imagining himself not as the unseen male on whom both women are about to turn their attention, but as one of the women engaging in lesbian sex. (Susie Bright’s excellent article, “Men Who Love Lesbians (who don’t care for them too much),” in 1993, was one of the first mainstream pieces to suggest male lesbianism as a radical form of queerness rather than as a patriarchal appropriation of women’s sexuality.)

Objectifying Sexual Fantasies

Many readers, in learning about girlfag and guydyke identities, might feel some concern for the life path of a woman or man so identified — after all, what are the possibilities for a romantic future for someone whose lust object is, by definition, not interested in them? I’m happy to report that many of us do indeed settle into stable and happy arrangements — sometimes in a relationship (often non-monogamous) — with the gay man or lesbian of our dreams. Sometimes, like me, in a relationship with a bisexual whose affection and values are “gay enough” to meet our desires. Sometimes with a fellow girlfag (leading to a relationship between two female-assigned people who relate and play as gay men) or a fellow guydyke (creating a “lesbian relationship” between two male-assigned people). Some girlfags and guydykes, like other genderqueers, may find their male or female identities waxing and waning over time, and may seek out partners flexible enough to follow their lead.

Girlfags and guydykes are sometimes accused of objectifying gay male/lesbian sexuality — to which I answer, resoundingly, “Duh”: Sexual fantasy is inherently objectifying in that it tends to focus on a projected image of the fantasy object rather than on the entire, complex human being. But a well-behaved girlfag or guydyke, like a well-behaved person of any gender or orientation, does not project their fantasies onto non-consenting partners. Female-presenting people who insist on invading men’s spaces, or male-presenting people who do the same to women’s spaces, are beneath contempt, as are those of any gender who pester uninterested people for attention, dates or sex. Such behaviors have nothing to do with ethical girlfaggery or guydykery.

Viable Gender Models

By far the greatest obstacle facing most girlfags and guydykes, though, is angry resistance from those wedded to binary gender, often monosexuals (entirely gay or entirely heterosexual), who worry that our very existence calls into question the immutability of gender and orientation. For those who consider the world to be clearly divided between men and women (and thus gay and straight people), girlfags and guydykes present an intractable problem: In that worldview, it is impossible for a woman to be a gay man, or a man a lesbian.

Such statements point to simplistic beliefs about gender — that “male” equals “masculine” equals “XY-chromosomed” equals “penis-owning,” for example. The reality that one individual may have a vulva, may present as masculine, may have XY chromosomes and androgen insensitivity syndrome and may be legally female — just to pick a random sampling of the chaos of criteria that are supposed to encompass gender in our culture — mocks the reductiveness of the old binary gender system.

Another oversimplification of the girlfag/guydyke identity comes from a controversial and pathologizing theory about cross-dressers and transsexuals, holding that they are expressing “autogynephilia/autoandrophilia” — erotic attraction to the image of themselves as a person of another gender. Given the spectrum of gender presentation among girlfags and guydykes, which ranges from exaggeration of one’s assigned gender through full gender transition, and all stations between, this theory appears to be a desperate attempt to cling to a no-longer-viable binary gender model.

Relevant books written for non-academic readers include Straight: The Surprisingly Short History of Heterosexuality by Hanne BlankThe End of Gay (and the Death of Heterosexuality) by Bert Archer, and PoMoSexuals: Challenging Assumptions About Gender and Sexuality by Carol Queen and Lawrence Schimel. You might also want to check out my own Girlfag: A Life Told in Sex and Musicals while you’re at it.

And if, after checking out a few of these resources, you find yourself looking with fresh eyes at your history of romantic attractions — remember that beautiful, soft-spoken boy in high school with whom you did everything but, and who still shows up in your fantasies once in a while? Or that softball-playing tomboy whose butt looked amazing in jeans but whose short haircut seemed to be a clear statement that you weren’t batting for her team? Well, welcome to our world.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: Yulia Grigoryeva / Agnieszka Lobodzinska / Shutterstock.com

Donate image - CopyWe bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your donation is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a sponsor.


Only Fair Observer members can comment. Please login to comment.


  1. anon

    May 31, 2015

    what the fuck? this is the most disgusting thing ive read.

  2. TL

    May 1, 2015

    Gender is a spectrum. Sexuality is a spectrum. Do any of the haters commenting actually disagree with either of those statements? I am a queer woman, and my girlfriend is, behaviorally, a Kinsey 5.5. One of her biggest kinks is the idea of straight sex, but she's not bi-romantic in the least. Is there any reason for her to try to change who she is, or to hide it? Are the thought police coming for her next? Does the fact that we enjoy playing as gay men on occasion make us homophobes in addition to being queer women? "There are more [genders and sexualities] in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

  3. Lil

    April 28, 2015

    Holy cow this article is so legitimately bad. I don't care if she's straight or not. This is still turning gay men and women into a fetish all while using incredibly disgusting slurs typically not belonging to the people trying to claim them. Not to mention that "girlfag" WAS COINED AS A JOKE. A JOKE. TO MAKE FUN OF PEOPLE LIKE THIS. Please burn this article.

  4. Dany Mitev

    April 28, 2015

    well this is by far the most disgusting thing i've read in my entire life

  5. April

    April 26, 2015

    This is so disgusting. There is no such thing as a "male lesbian," that's a straight man. And straight men who fetishize lesbians are gross. Lesbian sexuality DOES NOT include men IN ANY WAY. Women who have sex with both men and women are BISEXUAL. Stop being a homophobe.


    April 24, 2015

    *italian chef voice* mamma mia, thats'a spicy discourse!

  7. Ja Dee

    April 24, 2015

    L, you said it perfectly. How are others who aren't sexually oriented in the above way supposed to know why someone finds lesbian or gay sex attractive? Isn't that the same as a straight person explaining to a gay or lesbian person why they shouldn't be attracted to the same gender? It's abhorrent to suggest that you know what another person's sexual orientation is. I feel like I cannot safely express my orientation here without one of these people attacking me after these regressive comments.

  8. Ja Dee

    April 24, 2015

    Lots of close-minded people here. Not only are you being bigoted by suggesting that straight people are "arrogant and oblivious" by nature of them being heterosexual, but you are also calling a bisexual women homophobic when this article suggests nothing of the sort whatsoever. While you are busy being offended over every little thing, even things that are far from being offensive, this woman is writing something far more progressive when it comes to sexual orientation than anything I've ever seen. We've seen it throughout history though, the most progressive of people, who are too far ahead of their times, have always been attacked for one thing or another.

  9. L

    April 23, 2015

    I should clarify that it obviously is not just about fantasies but how you identify as well. It really seems as though no one commenting on the article read it or even looked at the author's bio page (she is the author of the Ethical Slut, a fantastic book).

  10. L

    April 23, 2015

    Sweet baby jesus. How is this offensive? Different people have different fantasies. Lots (perhaps most?) of people fantasize about straight sex. Is that objectifying heterosexuals? If it is, does it matter? Are most people commenting here trying to police what others find sexy? You like what you like and I think this article resonates with many people. I know it did with me. Thanks for writing this article Janet.

  11. J

    April 22, 2015

    This is nasty homophobic garbage, I can't believe this is considered progressive and "radically queer" in 2015.

  12. K

    April 21, 2015

    Just because she isn't straight doesn't mean this isn't incredibly disgusting and homophobic. Which it is. I did read it, and it was vile garbage. It made me sick.

  13. reeealsubtle

    April 21, 2015

    A man who wants to fuck lesbian women is a heterosexual man, he is not any other gender, if people can 'love other people regardless of gender' and don't have sexual orientations then why doesn't conversion therapy work. Oh wait. Because sexuality is based on innate desire you drip

  14. J B

    April 21, 2015

    Every site should require a short reading comprehension quiz based on the text before people are allowed to comment. It's obvious from the other comments that folks either haven't read the piece, or are woefully unprepared to digest and comprehend written English.

  15. SN

    April 21, 2015

    She's not straight.

  16. SN

    April 21, 2015

    Janet Hardy is a queer writer. I'm sorry you haven't heard of her; you're missing out on some great books.

  17. Leslie Meredith

    April 21, 2015

    I'm very surprised that anyone here thinks Janet Hardy is straight. Haven't any of you ever read any of her books? She has spoken many times about her relationships with partners of more than one gender.

  18. anon

    April 21, 2015

    uhh no trust me we read the article and it went from bad to worse

  19. Bisexual and Abhorred

    April 21, 2015

    No, it's absolute trash. Fetishizing gay and lesbian people does not make you queer. Using slurs directed at us in quirky terms so you can feel special does not make you queer. Objectifying us, acting like it's not fetishization and disgusting because "all sex is objectification", then pretending it's somehow radical and deservedly queer is absolute bullshit. Making gay and lesbians out to be sticks in the mud for only being attracted to men/women when in reality THEY ARE ONLY ATTRACTED TO MEN/WOMEN is absolutely disgusting. Calling your bisexual husband "just gay enough" is absolutely disgusting. Especially men who apparently connect with lesbians in lesbian porn. Lesbians are uncomfortable with men's attraction and it is so so so lesbophobic and disgusting to pretend that these men who direct their objectification at lesbians are somehow queer. This is homophobic, lesbophobic, biphobic, transphobic garbage and it makes me want to vomit. LGBQ people are abandoned, raped, murdered, fired, made fun of, and, nowadays, losing many human rights just for being attracted to the same gender as their own. Fetishizing people who are attracted to the same gender as their own and are not attracted to their fetishizers does not make you opressed. It does not give you radical queerness. Straight people who are not ace or trans pretending they have a place in this community is sickening enough without them being so absolutely homophobic.

  20. Amanda Jones

    April 20, 2015

    I think most of the comments above are by people who only read the headline but couldn't be bothered to read the actual article. The article is clearly about people who love others regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

  21. mary

    April 20, 2015

    This is homophobic, biphobic, transphobic, and all-around disgusting. I am once again baffled by how arrogant and oblivious straight people can be.

  22. anon

    April 20, 2015

    who let a straight woman write an article on lgbt+ people holy shit

  23. anon

    April 20, 2015

    this is maybe the most homophobic thing i have ever seen...

  24. K

    April 19, 2015

    This is disgusting. Stop using slurs and stop forcing yourself in places you don't belong just because you fetishize gay people. As a lesbian, I'm absolutely disgusted. You're not welcome in our community.

  25. Anon

    April 19, 2015

    I think this is legitimately the worst thing I've ever read

  26. inspired ella

    April 19, 2015

    imagine hating gay people this much. i honestly don't know how straight people can write stuff like this and not realize that they're homophobes.

  27. Loreva

    April 19, 2015


  28. Rae

    April 19, 2015

    Set this article on fire.

Leave a comment

Support Fair Observer

We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.

For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.

In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.

We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost money.
Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a sustaining member.

Will you support FO’s journalism?

We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.

Donation Cycle

Donation Amount

The IRS recognizes Fair Observer as a section 501(c)(3) registered public charity (EIN: 46-4070943), enabling you to claim a tax deduction.

Make Sense of the World

Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

Support Fair Observer

Support Fair Observer by becoming a sustaining member

Become a Member