Revision as of 00:33, 29 March 2011 editWhatamIdoing (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers122,024 edits Repairing lead previously deemed "inadequate"; rm contentious POV-pushing about "he alleges"; rm misrepresentation of sources; rm misuse of sources per previous talk page consensus← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 09:32, 3 January 2025 edit undoGreenLipstickLesbian (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers16,153 edits Moving from Category:English-language books to Category:English-language non-fiction books using Cat-a-lot | ||
(248 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|2003 book by J. Michael Bailey}} | |||
{{POV|date=November 2010}} | |||
{{Infobox book| <!-- See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Novels or Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Books --> | {{Infobox book| <!-- See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Novels or Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Books --> | ||
| name = |
| name = The Man Who Would Be Queen | ||
| image = TMWWBQjacket.jpg | |||
| title_orig = | |||
| |
| caption = Cover | ||
| image = ] | |||
| author = ] | | author = ] | ||
| cover_artist = | | cover_artist = | ||
| country = United States |
| country = United States | ||
| language = English | | language = English | ||
| series = | | series = | ||
| |
| subjects = {{plainlist| | ||
* ] | |||
* ]ism}} | |||
| publisher = ] imprint of the ] | | publisher = ] imprint of the ] | ||
| |
| pub_date = 2003 | ||
| media_type = Print (] |
| media_type = Print (] and ebook PDF) | ||
| pages = 256 | | pages = 256 | ||
| isbn = |
| isbn = 978-0-309-08418-5 | ||
| dewey= 305.38/9664 21 | | dewey = 305.38/9664 21 | ||
| congress= HQ76.2.U5 B35 2003 | | congress = HQ76.2.U5 B35 2003 | ||
| oclc= 51088011 | | oclc = 51088011 | ||
| preceded_by = | | preceded_by = | ||
| followed_by = | | followed_by = | ||
}} | |||
'''''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''''' is a 2003 book by the American psychologist ], published by ].<ref name="jhp">Bailey, J. Michael (2003). ''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press (National Academies Press). {{ISBN|978-0-309-08418-5}}</ref> | |||
In the first section of the book, Bailey discusses gender-atypical behavior and ] in children, emphasizing the biological determination of ]. In the second section, he deals primarily with gay men, including the link between childhood gender dysphoria and male ] later in life. Bailey reviews evidence that male homosexuality is congenital (a result of genetics and ] environment), and he argues for the accuracy of some ]s.<ref name="Bailey76">Bailey (2003), p. 76.</ref> In the third section, Bailey summarizes evidence for the ] typology of ] that claims there are two forms of ] that affect transgender women: one as an extreme type of male homosexuality and one that is a sexual interest in having a female body, called ]. | |||
The book caused considerable controversy which led to a formal investigation by ], where Bailey was |
The book caused considerable controversy, which led to complaints and a formal investigation by ], where Bailey was chair of the psychology department until shortly before the investigation concluded. Northwestern ultimately found no basis for the complaints,{{r|Dreger 2008}}<ref>Barlow, G. (December 17, 2003). "NU professor faces sexual allegations". ''Chicago Free Press.''</ref> and a university spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship had nothing to do with the investigation.<ref>{{cite news |author=Davis, Andrew |url=http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=6810 |title=Northwestern Sex Researcher Investigated, Results Unknown |newspaper=Windy City Times |date=December 8, 2004 |quote=Bailey resigned as chairman of the university's psychology department in October, Alan K. Cubbage, a Northwestern spokesman, told the ''Chronicle.'' Cubbage added that the change had nothing to do with the investigation. Bailey remains a full professor at the university.}}</ref> According to Bailey, some of his critics were motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about the autogynephilia theory of transgender women.<ref name="McCarthyism">{{cite web |author=J. Michael Bailey |title=Academic McCarthyism. For the first time in public, NU Prof. J. Michael Bailey answers allegations of ethical and sexual misconduct |url=http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 |access-date=2008-07-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070807075502/http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 |archive-date=2007-08-07}}, Northwestern Chronicle, 10-09-2005</ref> | ||
==Summary== | ==Summary== | ||
⚫ | ''The Man Who Would Be Queen'' is divided into three sections: "The Boy Who Would Be Princess", "The Man He Might Become", and "Women Who Once Were Boys". | ||
⚫ | It starts with an anecdote about a child Bailey calls "Danny". Bailey writes of Danny's mother, who has been frustrated by other therapists she has seen about her son's "feminine" behavior.<ref name="bailey16">Bailey (2003), p. 16.</ref> Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist ]'s work with children whose parents have noticed significant gender-atypical behaviors. Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to describe ], a label applied to males with significant feminine behaviors and females with significant masculine behaviors, such as ]. For example, this class includes boys that prefer to play with dolls and regularly identify with female characters in stories or movies, and girls that prefer to play with ]s and identify with male characters. This section of the book also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, ] to the female sex shortly after their birth, and emphasizes the fact that, despite this, they tended to exhibit typically male characteristics and often identified as men. | ||
⚫ | ''The Man Who Would Be Queen'' is divided into three sections: |
||
⚫ | The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood ] and male homosexuality later in life. Bailey discusses whether homosexuality is a congenitally or possibly even genetically related phenomenon. This discussion includes references to Bailey's studies as well as those of neuroscientist ] and geneticist ]. He also discusses the behavior of gay men and its stereotypically masculine and feminine qualities. | ||
⚫ | It starts with an anecdote about a child Bailey calls "Danny |
||
⚫ | In the third section, Bailey summarizes a taxonomy of trans women that was proposed by ] about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of trans women: one described as an "extreme form of male homosexuality", the other being motivated by ].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blanchard |first1=R. |last2=Clemmensen |first2=L. J. |last3=Steiner |first3=B. W. |year=1987 |title=Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria |journal=Archives of Sexual Behavior |volume=16 |issue=2 |pages=139–152 |doi=10.1007/BF01542067 |pmid=3592961 |s2cid=43199925}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blanchard |first1=R. |year=1989 |title=The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria |journal=Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease |volume=177 |issue=10 |pages=616–623 |doi=10.1097/00005053-198910000-00004 |pmid=2794988}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blanchard |first1=R. |year=1989 |title=The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias |journal=Archives of Sexual Behavior |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=315–334 |doi=10.1007/BF01541951 |pmid=2673136 |s2cid=43151898}}</ref> Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs. | ||
⚫ | The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood |
||
==Reception== | |||
⚫ | In the third section, Bailey summarizes a taxonomy of |
||
⚫ | The book elicited both strongly supportive and strongly negative reactions. The controversial aspects included the contents of the book, whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press, and whether it should have been promoted as a scientific work. According to ]'s story in '']'', "To many of Dr. Bailey's peers, his story is a morality play about the corrosive effects of ] on ]."<ref name="carey2007" /> Interviewed by Carey, bioethicist ] argues that "what happened to Bailey is important, because the harassment was so extraordinarily bad and because it could happen to any researcher in the field. If we're going to have research at all, then we're going to have people saying unpopular things, and if this is what happens to them, then we've got problems not only for science but free expression itself."<ref name="carey2007" /> | ||
⚫ | However, critics such as ] think that the pointed criticism, including filing charges, was warranted: "Nothing we have done, I believe, and certainly nothing I have done, overstepped any boundaries of fair comment on a book and an author who stepped into the public arena with enthusiasm to deliver a false and unscientific and politically damaging opinion".<ref name="carey2007" /> The concern over academic freedom was dismissed by ], who wrote: "The death of free speech and academic freedom has been highly exaggerated. Science is not free of politics, never has been, and never will be."<ref name="Moser">{{cite journal |author=Charles Moser |title=A Different Perspective |journal=Archives of Sexual Behavior |volume=37 |issue=3 |date=June 2008 |doi=10.1007/s10508-008-9331-3 |pmid=18431627 |pages=472–475 |s2cid=9182715}}</ref> | ||
On the last page of the book, Bailey meets "Danny", who no longer has gender identity disorder, and is living as a gay man. | |||
==Controversy== | |||
The book elicited both strongly negative and strongly supporting reactions. Among the controversial aspects were not only the contents of the book, but whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press, and whether it should have been promoted as a scientific work. | |||
===Positive reactions=== | ===Positive reactions=== | ||
] concluded: "Despite its provocative title, a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition."<ref name="napsales"> via ]. Retrieved 6 September 2008.</ref> The book received praise from |
'']'' concluded: "Despite its provocative title, a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition."<ref name="napsales"> via ]. Retrieved 6 September 2008.</ref> The book received praise from sexual behavior scientist ],<ref name="napsales"/> from sex-differences expert ],<ref name="Dreger 2008">{{cite journal |last=Dreger |first=Alice D. |title=The Controversy Surrounding The Man Who Would Be Queen: A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age |journal=Archives of Sexual Behavior |volume=37 |issue=3 |pages=366–421 |date=June 2008 |pmid=18431641 |doi=10.1007/s10508-007-9301-1 |pmc=3170124}}</ref> and from research psychologist ], who wrote: "The Man Who Would Be Queen may upset the guardians of political correctness on both the left and the right, but it will be welcomed by intellectually curious people of all sexes and sexual orientations."<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10530 |title=The Man Who Would Be Queen: Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism |publisher=The National Academies Press |work=Catalog |access-date=2009-02-21 |isbn=9780309505543 |date=2003-04-02 |doi=10.17226/10530}}</ref><ref name="pinker2003">Pinker, Steven (June 28, 2003). '']''</ref> It also received praise from '']'' magazine's ]<ref name="seligman2003">Seligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). '']''</ref> and from Mark Henderson at '']''.<ref name="henderson2003">Henderson, Mark (December 6, 2003). '']''</ref> Conservative commentator ] said: "a wealth of fascinating information, carefully gathered by (it seems to me) a conscientious and trustworthy scientific observer."<ref name="derbyshire2003">Derbyshire, John (June 30, 2003). '']''</ref> It also received a positive review from writer Ethan Boatner<ref name="napsales"/> of '']'' magazine and Duncan Osborne in '']''.<ref name="osborne2003">Osborne, Duncan (March 2003). 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' (review). '']'', March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 9, pp. 54–54.</ref> Research psychologist ] also wrote a positive review of the book in the newsletter of ]'s Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues (Division 44).<ref>Cantor, James M. (2003) {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727071045/http://www.apadivision44.org/publications/newsletters/2003summer.pdf |date=2011-07-27 }}", APA Division 44 Newsletter 19(2): 6.</ref> ], Northwestern University professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics, also praised the book, stating that "plenty of gay and transgender people" who had read the book, saw it as accurate and "wonderfully supportive of LGBT people".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dreger |first=Alice Domurat |url=http://archive.org/details/galileosmiddlefi0000dreg_r3w2 |title=Galileo's middle finger : heretics, activists, and the search for justice in science |date=2015 |publisher=Penguin Press |isbn=978-1-59420-608-5 |location=New York |pages=86}}</ref> | ||
The Man Who Would Be Queen: Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism | publisher = The National Academies Press | work = Catalog | accessdate = 2009-02-21 }}</ref><ref name="pinker2003">Pinker, Steven (June 28, 2003). '']''</ref> It also received praise from conservative journalist ],<ref name="napsales"/> as well as Fortune magazines ],<ref name="seligman2003">Seligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). '']''</ref> and Mark Henderson.<ref name="henderson2003">Henderson, Mark (December 6, 2003). '']''</ref> Conservative commentator ] said: "a wealth of fascinating information, carefully gathered by (it seems to me) a conscientious and trustworthy scientific observer."<ref name="derbyshire2003">Derbyshire, John (June 30, 2003). '']''</ref> It also received a positive review from writer Ethan Boatner<ref name="napsales"/> of '']'' and Duncan Osborne in '']''.<ref name="osborne2003">Osborne, Duncan (March 2003). 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' (review). '']'', March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 9, pp. 54-54.</ref> Research psychologist ] also wrote a positive review of the book in the newsletter of ]'s Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues (Division 44).<ref>Cantor, James M. (2003) ", APA Division 44 Newsletter 19(2): 6.</ref> | |||
In December 2003, the ] (SPLC) reported that many of the early supporters of Bailey's book, including Ray Blanchard, were members of the ].<ref name="splc_20031231">{{Cite web |url=https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/northwestern-university-psychology-professor-j-michael-bailey-looks-queer-science |title=Northwestern University Psychology Professor J. Michael Bailey Looks into Queer Science |website=Southern Poverty Law Center |last1=Beirich |first1=Heidi |last2=Moser |first2=Bob |date=31 December 2003 |access-date=15 October 2022}}</ref> | |||
===Negative reactions=== | ===Negative reactions=== | ||
⚫ | The public response of members of the transgender community was almost entirely negative.<ref name="Dreger 2008" /> Among other things, they opposed the book's endorsement of ],<ref name="klein2004">Klein, Julie M. (May 2004). ''Seed Magazine'', May/June 2004</ref> and its publication by the ], by whom it was "advertised as science"<ref name="krasny2007">Krasny, Michael (August 22, 2007). Forum with Michael Krasny, ]</ref> and marketed as "scientifically accurate,"<ref name="roughgarden2003"/> which they argued was untrue. They also claimed the book exploited children with ].<ref name="carey2007">Carey, Benedict (August 21, 2007). . ''The New York Times''. Retrieved September 19, 2007.</ref> Among those criticizing the book were computer scientist ],<ref name="marcus2003">Marcus, Jon (August 1, 2003). Transsexuals Protest. '']'', p. 13</ref> biologists ]<ref name="roughgarden2003">Roughgarden, Joan (June 4, 2004). . ''Times Higher Education''. No. 1643, p. 20.</ref> and ],<ref name="holden2003">Holden, Constance (July 18, 2003). , ] mirrored at </ref> physician ],<ref name="wct2003">Staff report (June 25, 2003). ''Windy City Times''</ref> economist ],<ref name="mccloskey2003">McCloskey, Deirdre (November 2003). '']'', November 2003</ref> psychologist Madeline Wyndzen, writers ],<ref name="denny2004">Denny, Dallas (December 13, 2004). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080720161411/http://www.ifge.org/Article244.phtml |date=2008-07-20 }} ''Transgender Tapestry'' #104, Winter 2004</ref> ],<ref name="park2003">Park, Pauline (May 30, 2003). ''Gay City News''</ref> ],<ref name="green2003">Green J (2003). '']''</ref> and ],<ref name="surkan2007">Surkan, K (2007). Transsexuals Protest Academic Exploitation. In Lillian Faderman, Yolanda Retter, Horacio Roque Ramírez, eds. ''Great Events From History: Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Events, 1848–2006.'' pages 111–114. Salem Press {{ISBN|978-1-58765-263-9}}</ref> as well as ] of ], and Executive Director Monica Casper of the ].<ref name="tapestry2004">The Ups and Downs of J. Michael Bailey. ''Transgender Tapestry'' #104, Winter 2004, pp. 53–54.</ref> James, a transgender advocate, attacked Bailey by constructing a website with pictures of Bailey's children taken from his public website beside sexually explicit captions.<ref name="carey2007"/> | ||
Negative responses also came from outside the transgender community. Liza Mundy of '']'' thought the book was exceptionally dull despite the potentially interesting topic.<ref name="mundy2003">Mundy, Liza (March 23, 2003). Codes of Behavior. '']''</ref> Sexologist ] referred to the book as "an unfortunate setback in feelings of trust between the transgender community and sex researchers,".<ref name="Dreger 2008"/> Eli Coleman was then President of the ] (]).<ref name="Dreger 2008"/> In response to the criticism, Ray Blanchard resigned from his position at HBIGDA on November 4, 2003.<ref name="Dreger 2008"/> | |||
⚫ | The public response of members of the transgender community was almost entirely negative. Among other things, they opposed the book's endorsement of ],<ref name="klein2004">Klein, Julie M. (May 2004). ''Seed Magazine'', May/June 2004</ref> and its publication by the ], by whom it was "advertised as science"<ref name="krasny2007">Krasny, Michael (August 22, 2007). Forum with Michael Krasny, ]</ref> and marketed as "scientifically accurate,"<ref name="roughgarden2003"/> which they argued was untrue. They also claimed the book exploited children with ].<ref name="carey2007">Carey, Benedict |
||
Negative responses came from outside the transgender community as well. Liza Mundy of the '']'' thought the book exceptionally dull despite the potentially interesting topic.<ref name="mundy2003">Mundy, Liza (March 23, 2003). Codes of Behavior. '']''</ref> Psychologist ] referred to the book as "an unfortunate setback in feelings of trust between the transgender community and sex researchers,"<ref name="dreger2008"/> and his colleague, Walter Bockting, wrote that it was "yet another blow to the delicate relationship between clinicians, scholars, and the transgender community."<ref name="bockting2005">Bockting, Walter O. (2005). Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality. ''Journal of Sex Research'', 42, 267-270.</ref> ] Director ] referred to the book as "not science", later clarifying that "it promoted a very derogatory explanation of transgender identity which most TG people would find extremely hurtful and humiliating….Whether based on science or not we have a responsibility to present scientific ideas, particularly in the public arena, in ways which are not blatantly hurtful. But in addition to that, did not support his analysis in a scientific manner—hence my comment."<ref name="dreger2008"/> Psychologist ] said of Bailey, "He's set back the field 100 years, as far as I'm concerned."<ref name="klein2004">Klein, Julia (May 2004). ''Seed''</ref> | |||
Eli Coleman's colleague, Walter Bockting, wrote that it was "yet another blow to the delicate relationship between clinicians, scholars, and the transgender community."<ref name="bockting2005">{{cite journal |last1=Bockting |first1=Walter O. |year=2005 |title=Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality. |doi=10.1080/00224490509552281 |journal=Journal of Sex Research |volume=42 |issue=3 |pages=267–270 |s2cid=216088335}}</ref> ] Director ] said the book promoted a derogatory explanation of transgender identity that would hurt many vulnerable transgender people, and that the book, which was written in a ] style, did not support the material in a scientific manner.<ref name="Dreger 2008"/> Psychologist Randi Ettner said of Bailey, "He's set back the field 100 years, as far as I'm concerned."<ref name="klein2004" /> | |||
Originally, the ] nominated the book as a finalist in the ] award category for 2003. ] immediately protested the nomination and gathered thousands of petition signatures in just a few days. Under pressure from the petition, the Foundation withdrew the nomination.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004/03/16/3 |title = Group rescinds honor for disputed book |first = Patrick |last = Letellier |authorlink = |date = 2004-03-16 |work = Gay.com |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080505120340/http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004/03/16/3 |archivedate = 2008-05-05 |accessdate = 2010-01-10 }}</ref> | |||
''The Man Who Would Be Queen'' was originally one of the finalists for the ] for the "transgender" category.<ref name="letellier_20040316">{{cite web |url=http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004/03/16/3 |title=Group rescinds honor for disputed book |first=Patrick |last=Letellier |date=16 March 2004 |work=Gay.com |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080505120340/http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004%2F03%2F16%2F3 |archive-date=5 May 2008 |access-date=26 October 2022 |url-status=dead}}</ref> However, after judicial review, the book was determined to be "]" and "not appropriate for the category", so it was removed from consideration.<ref name="letellier_20040316"/><ref>{{cite web |title=Letter to ''New York Times'', Sept 20, 2007 |url=http://www.lambdaliterary.org/archives/archives.html |publisher=Lambda Literary Foundation |work=Press Room |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080517091559/http://lambdaliterary.org/archives/archives.html |date=20 September 2007|archive-date=17 May 2008 |access-date=26 October 2022 }}</ref> | |||
], a transgender advocate, attacked Bailey by constructing a website with pictures of Bailey's children taken from his public website beside sexually explicit captions.<ref name="carey2007"/> James has said that she was echoing the disrespect that Bailey's work shows for vulnerable people, including children.<ref name=children>{{cite web |url=http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/bailey-children.html |title=A note regarding Bailey's children |author=James, Andrea |accessdate=2009-09-26}}</ref> | |||
⚫ | ===Allegations of malpractice=== | ||
In 2008, Northwestern University professor of clinical medical humanities and ] Alice Dreger commented on Bailey's response to the negative reactions: "Bailey may claim he was not insensitive, but given the number of people he offended with his prose, he is obviously, objectively wrong—being perceived as insensitive by this many people surely means you have been insensitive. (Especially if you don’t get that.)"<ref>{{cite doi|10.1007/s10508-008-9348-7}}</ref> Charles Moser though believes that Bailey caused his own controversy by being mean spirited. "To call a transsexual who denies Autogynephilia vigorously autogynephilic or an autogynephile-in-denial is also inflammatory and inappropriate. One can convey the same point with more cautious language. In general, researchers should avoid inciting hostility from their subjects. Stating that a subject is in denial or misleading the researcher usually leads to an angry reaction. Ridiculing someone for their beliefs, religious, political, or gender identification is never a good strategy. Ignoring these common courtesies will probably lead to an ugly confrontation, such as this “controversy.” Being a researcher does not confer immunity from the consequences of incivility. "<ref name="Moser">{{cite journal | author = Charles Moser | title = A Different Perspective | journal = Archives of Sexual Behavior | volume = 37 | issue = 3 |month=June | year=2008}}</ref> | |||
⚫ | Two of the trans women in Bailey's book have accused him of ethical breaches in his work by talking to them about their life stories without obtaining formal written consent.<ref>Wilson, Robin. "Transsexual 'Subjects' Complain About Professor's Research Methods." ''The Chronicle of Higher Education'' 25 July 2003, Vol. 49, Issue 46. ''"The book contains numerous observations and reports of interviews with me", C. Anjelica Kieltyka, one of the transsexual women, wrote in a letter this month to C. Bradley Moore, Northwestern's vice president for research. She added: "I did not receive, nor was I asked to sign, an informed-consent document."''</ref> Alice Dreger alleged that the women were aware that Bailey was writing a book about trans women at the time of the interviews; some of them read the drafts of the book before publication,<ref name="Dreger 2008" /> and several said they felt their stories had been told "accurately and sympathetically."<ref name="nymag.com"/> Bailey has denied that it is unethical for a university professor to talk to people in the same manner that ]s do, or to write books with the resulting anecdotes. He also stated that the book was "popular and not 'scientific'" so it was not required to follow ] rules.<ref name="McCarthyism" /> | ||
⚫ | ===Allegations |
||
⚫ | Two of the |
||
According to |
According to Dreger, whether federal regulations required professors to obtain formal approval from a university IRB before interviewing people was uncertain at the time;<ref name="Dreger 2008" /> she points out that shortly after publication of the book, the US Department of Health and Human Services, in conjunction with the ] and ], issued a formal statement that taking ], conducting interviews, collecting anecdotes, and similar activities do not constitute IRB-qualified research, and were never intended to be covered by clinical research rules, when such work is "neither systematic nor generalizable in the scientific sense."<ref name="Dreger 2008" /><ref name="OralHistory">{{Cite book |last1=Ritchie |first1=Don |last2=Shopes |first2=Linda |year=2003 |title=Oral History Excluded from IRB Review: Application of the Department of Health and Human Services Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects at 45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A to Oral History Interviewing |publisher=] |url=http://alpha.dickinson.edu/oha/org_irb.html |access-date=31 December 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080117043701/http://alpha.dickinson.edu/oha/org_irb.html |archive-date=17 January 2008}}. See also {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080115224655/http://alpha.dickinson.edu/oha/org_irbupdate.html |date=2008-01-15 }}</ref> | ||
| last = Ritchie | |||
| first = Don | |||
| last2 = Shopes | |||
| first2 = Linda | |||
| year =2003 | |||
| title =Oral History Excluded from IRB Review: Application of the Department of Health and Human Services Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects at 45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A to Oral History Interviewing | |||
| publisher =] | |||
|url=http://alpha.dickinson.edu/oha/org_irb.html | |||
|accessdate=31 December 2008}}. See also </ref> | |||
Also |
Also cited as harassment of Bailey were legal complaints that Bailey was ]. The basis for these complaints was that ] in the US requires authorization letters from two psychologists, and Bailey had written a second letter, at no charge and upon request, for some individuals Bailey had spoken with while writing the book. American bioethicist ] notes that there was no legal basis for this claim, as Bailey received no compensation for his services, and was forthright in his letters about his qualifications, even attaching copies of his C.V.: "Presumably all this was why never bothered to pursue the charge, although you'd never know that from reading the press accounts, which mentioned only the complaints, not that they had petered out."<ref name="nymag.com"/> State regulators took no action on these complaints.<ref name="carey2007" /> | ||
In her book '']'' (2015), bioethicist ] accused Bailey's critics of attempting to make it look as though virtually every trans woman represented in Bailey's book "had felt abused by him and had filed a charge".<ref name="nymag.com">{{Cite news |last=Singal |first=Jesse |title=Why Some of the Worst Attacks on Social Science Have Come From Liberals |url=http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/12/when-liberals-attack-social-science.html |work=New York |date=30 December 2015 |access-date=1 January 2016}}</ref> One of Bailey's critics, transgender academic ], argued that the critics' actions had not overstepped the boundaries of fair comment about what she saw as an "unscientific" opinion.<ref name="carey2007" /> | |||
=== Academic freedom === | |||
⚫ | According to ]'s |
||
== See also == | |||
⚫ | However, critics such as ] think that the pointed criticism, including filing charges, was warranted: "Nothing we have done, I believe, and certainly nothing I have done, overstepped any boundaries of fair comment on a book and an author who stepped into the public arena with enthusiasm to deliver a false and unscientific and politically damaging opinion".<ref name="carey2007"/> The concern over academic freedom was dismissed by ], who wrote: "The death of free speech and academic freedom has been highly exaggerated. Science is not free of politics, never has been, and never will be."<ref name="Moser"/> | ||
* ] | |||
* '']'' | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{ |
{{reflist}} | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
* Chapter 9 of the book in HTML (about autogynephilia) | * Chapter 9 of the book in HTML (about autogynephilia) | ||
* The full book, for purchase or free PDF download | |||
* by author J. Michael Bailey | * by author J. Michael Bailey | ||
* by Madeline H. Wyndzen | * by Madeline H. Wyndzen | ||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Man Who Would Be Queen}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 09:32, 3 January 2025
2003 book by J. Michael BaileyCover | |
Author | J. Michael Bailey |
---|---|
Language | English |
Subjects | |
Publisher | Joseph Henry Press imprint of the National Academies Press |
Publication date | 2003 |
Publication place | United States |
Media type | Print (hardcover and ebook PDF) |
Pages | 256 |
ISBN | 978-0-309-08418-5 |
OCLC | 51088011 |
Dewey Decimal | 305.38/9664 21 |
LC Class | HQ76.2.U5 B35 2003 |
The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism is a 2003 book by the American psychologist J. Michael Bailey, published by Joseph Henry Press.
In the first section of the book, Bailey discusses gender-atypical behavior and gender dysphoria in children, emphasizing the biological determination of gender. In the second section, he deals primarily with gay men, including the link between childhood gender dysphoria and male homosexuality later in life. Bailey reviews evidence that male homosexuality is congenital (a result of genetics and prenatal environment), and he argues for the accuracy of some gay stereotypes. In the third section, Bailey summarizes evidence for the Blanchard typology of trans women that claims there are two forms of transsexualism that affect transgender women: one as an extreme type of male homosexuality and one that is a sexual interest in having a female body, called autogynephilia.
The book caused considerable controversy, which led to complaints and a formal investigation by Northwestern University, where Bailey was chair of the psychology department until shortly before the investigation concluded. Northwestern ultimately found no basis for the complaints, and a university spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship had nothing to do with the investigation. According to Bailey, some of his critics were motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about the autogynephilia theory of transgender women.
Summary
The Man Who Would Be Queen is divided into three sections: "The Boy Who Would Be Princess", "The Man He Might Become", and "Women Who Once Were Boys".
It starts with an anecdote about a child Bailey calls "Danny". Bailey writes of Danny's mother, who has been frustrated by other therapists she has seen about her son's "feminine" behavior. Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist Kenneth Zucker's work with children whose parents have noticed significant gender-atypical behaviors. Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to describe gender identity disorder, a label applied to males with significant feminine behaviors and females with significant masculine behaviors, such as cross-dressing. For example, this class includes boys that prefer to play with dolls and regularly identify with female characters in stories or movies, and girls that prefer to play with toy cars and identify with male characters. This section of the book also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, reassigned to the female sex shortly after their birth, and emphasizes the fact that, despite this, they tended to exhibit typically male characteristics and often identified as men.
The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood gender identity disorder and male homosexuality later in life. Bailey discusses whether homosexuality is a congenitally or possibly even genetically related phenomenon. This discussion includes references to Bailey's studies as well as those of neuroscientist Simon LeVay and geneticist Dean Hamer. He also discusses the behavior of gay men and its stereotypically masculine and feminine qualities.
In the third section, Bailey summarizes a taxonomy of trans women that was proposed by Ray Blanchard about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of trans women: one described as an "extreme form of male homosexuality", the other being motivated by a sexual interest in having a female body. Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs.
Reception
The book elicited both strongly supportive and strongly negative reactions. The controversial aspects included the contents of the book, whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press, and whether it should have been promoted as a scientific work. According to Benedict Carey's story in The New York Times, "To many of Dr. Bailey's peers, his story is a morality play about the corrosive effects of political correctness on academic freedom." Interviewed by Carey, bioethicist Alice Dreger argues that "what happened to Bailey is important, because the harassment was so extraordinarily bad and because it could happen to any researcher in the field. If we're going to have research at all, then we're going to have people saying unpopular things, and if this is what happens to them, then we've got problems not only for science but free expression itself."
However, critics such as Deirdre McCloskey think that the pointed criticism, including filing charges, was warranted: "Nothing we have done, I believe, and certainly nothing I have done, overstepped any boundaries of fair comment on a book and an author who stepped into the public arena with enthusiasm to deliver a false and unscientific and politically damaging opinion". The concern over academic freedom was dismissed by Charles Allen Moser, who wrote: "The death of free speech and academic freedom has been highly exaggerated. Science is not free of politics, never has been, and never will be."
Positive reactions
Kirkus Reviews concluded: "Despite its provocative title, a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition." The book received praise from sexual behavior scientist Simon LeVay, from sex-differences expert David Buss, and from research psychologist Steven Pinker, who wrote: "The Man Who Would Be Queen may upset the guardians of political correctness on both the left and the right, but it will be welcomed by intellectually curious people of all sexes and sexual orientations." It also received praise from Forbes magazine's Daniel Seligman and from Mark Henderson at The Times. Conservative commentator John Derbyshire said: "a wealth of fascinating information, carefully gathered by (it seems to me) a conscientious and trustworthy scientific observer." It also received a positive review from writer Ethan Boatner of Lavender magazine and Duncan Osborne in Out. Research psychologist James Cantor also wrote a positive review of the book in the newsletter of APA's Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues (Division 44). Alice Dreger, Northwestern University professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics, also praised the book, stating that "plenty of gay and transgender people" who had read the book, saw it as accurate and "wonderfully supportive of LGBT people".
In December 2003, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reported that many of the early supporters of Bailey's book, including Ray Blanchard, were members of the Human Biodiversity Institute.
Negative reactions
The public response of members of the transgender community was almost entirely negative. Among other things, they opposed the book's endorsement of Blanchard's taxonomy of male-to-female transsexualism, and its publication by the National Academies Press, by whom it was "advertised as science" and marketed as "scientifically accurate," which they argued was untrue. They also claimed the book exploited children with gender dysphoria. Among those criticizing the book were computer scientist Lynn Conway, biologists Joan Roughgarden and Ben Barres, physician Rebecca Allison, economist Deirdre McCloskey, psychologist Madeline Wyndzen, writers Dallas Denny, Pauline Park, Jamison Green, and Andrea James, as well as Christine Burns of Press for Change, and Executive Director Monica Casper of the Intersex Society of North America. James, a transgender advocate, attacked Bailey by constructing a website with pictures of Bailey's children taken from his public website beside sexually explicit captions.
Negative responses also came from outside the transgender community. Liza Mundy of The Washington Post thought the book was exceptionally dull despite the potentially interesting topic. Sexologist Eli Coleman referred to the book as "an unfortunate setback in feelings of trust between the transgender community and sex researchers,". Eli Coleman was then President of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (World Professional Association for Transgender Health). In response to the criticism, Ray Blanchard resigned from his position at HBIGDA on November 4, 2003.
Eli Coleman's colleague, Walter Bockting, wrote that it was "yet another blow to the delicate relationship between clinicians, scholars, and the transgender community." Kinsey Institute Director John Bancroft said the book promoted a derogatory explanation of transgender identity that would hurt many vulnerable transgender people, and that the book, which was written in a popular science style, did not support the material in a scientific manner. Psychologist Randi Ettner said of Bailey, "He's set back the field 100 years, as far as I'm concerned."
The Man Who Would Be Queen was originally one of the finalists for the Lambda Literary Award for the "transgender" category. However, after judicial review, the book was determined to be "transphobic" and "not appropriate for the category", so it was removed from consideration.
Allegations of malpractice
Two of the trans women in Bailey's book have accused him of ethical breaches in his work by talking to them about their life stories without obtaining formal written consent. Alice Dreger alleged that the women were aware that Bailey was writing a book about trans women at the time of the interviews; some of them read the drafts of the book before publication, and several said they felt their stories had been told "accurately and sympathetically." Bailey has denied that it is unethical for a university professor to talk to people in the same manner that journalists do, or to write books with the resulting anecdotes. He also stated that the book was "popular and not 'scientific'" so it was not required to follow IRB rules.
According to Dreger, whether federal regulations required professors to obtain formal approval from a university IRB before interviewing people was uncertain at the time; she points out that shortly after publication of the book, the US Department of Health and Human Services, in conjunction with the Oral History Association and American Historical Association, issued a formal statement that taking oral histories, conducting interviews, collecting anecdotes, and similar activities do not constitute IRB-qualified research, and were never intended to be covered by clinical research rules, when such work is "neither systematic nor generalizable in the scientific sense."
Also cited as harassment of Bailey were legal complaints that Bailey was practicing psychology without a license. The basis for these complaints was that sex-reassignment surgery in the US requires authorization letters from two psychologists, and Bailey had written a second letter, at no charge and upon request, for some individuals Bailey had spoken with while writing the book. American bioethicist Alice Dreger notes that there was no legal basis for this claim, as Bailey received no compensation for his services, and was forthright in his letters about his qualifications, even attaching copies of his C.V.: "Presumably all this was why never bothered to pursue the charge, although you'd never know that from reading the press accounts, which mentioned only the complaints, not that they had petered out." State regulators took no action on these complaints.
In her book Galileo's Middle Finger (2015), bioethicist Alice Dreger accused Bailey's critics of attempting to make it look as though virtually every trans woman represented in Bailey's book "had felt abused by him and had filed a charge". One of Bailey's critics, transgender academic Deirdre McCloskey, argued that the critics' actions had not overstepped the boundaries of fair comment about what she saw as an "unscientific" opinion.
See also
- Causes of gender incongruence
- Men Trapped in Men's Bodies: Narratives of Autogynephilic Transsexualism
References
- Bailey, J. Michael (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press (National Academies Press). ISBN 978-0-309-08418-5
- Bailey (2003), p. 76.
- ^ Dreger, Alice D. (June 2008). "The Controversy Surrounding The Man Who Would Be Queen: A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 37 (3): 366–421. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9301-1. PMC 3170124. PMID 18431641.
- Barlow, G. (December 17, 2003). "NU professor faces sexual allegations". Chicago Free Press.
- Davis, Andrew (December 8, 2004). "Northwestern Sex Researcher Investigated, Results Unknown". Windy City Times.
Bailey resigned as chairman of the university's psychology department in October, Alan K. Cubbage, a Northwestern spokesman, told the Chronicle. Cubbage added that the change had nothing to do with the investigation. Bailey remains a full professor at the university.
- ^ J. Michael Bailey. "Academic McCarthyism. For the first time in public, NU Prof. J. Michael Bailey answers allegations of ethical and sexual misconduct". Archived from the original on 2007-08-07. Retrieved 2008-07-27., Northwestern Chronicle, 10-09-2005
- Bailey (2003), p. 16.
- Blanchard, R.; Clemmensen, L. J.; Steiner, B. W. (1987). "Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 16 (2): 139–152. doi:10.1007/BF01542067. PMID 3592961. S2CID 43199925.
- Blanchard, R. (1989). "The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria". Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease. 177 (10): 616–623. doi:10.1097/00005053-198910000-00004. PMID 2794988.
- Blanchard, R. (1989). "The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 18 (4): 315–334. doi:10.1007/BF01541951. PMID 2673136. S2CID 43151898.
- ^ Carey, Benedict (August 21, 2007). "Criticism of a Gender Theory, and a Scientist Under Siege". The New York Times. Retrieved September 19, 2007.
- Charles Moser (June 2008). "A Different Perspective". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 37 (3): 472–475. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9331-3. PMID 18431627. S2CID 9182715.
- ^ The Man Who Would Be Queen via National Academies Press. Retrieved 6 September 2008.
- The Man Who Would Be Queen: Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. The National Academies Press. 2003-04-02. doi:10.17226/10530. ISBN 9780309505543. Retrieved 2009-02-21.
{{cite book}}
:|work=
ignored (help) - Pinker, Steven (June 28, 2003). Pages for pleasure. The Guardian
- Seligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). Transsexuals And the Law. Forbes
- Henderson, Mark (December 6, 2003). Who's got the brains in this relationship? The Times
- Derbyshire, John (June 30, 2003). Lost in the Male. National Review
- Osborne, Duncan (March 2003). 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' (review). Out, March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 9, pp. 54–54.
- Cantor, James M. (2003) BOOK REVIEW: "The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey, The National Academies Press, 2003. Archived 2011-07-27 at the Wayback Machine", APA Division 44 Newsletter 19(2): 6.
- Dreger, Alice Domurat (2015). Galileo's middle finger : heretics, activists, and the search for justice in science. New York: Penguin Press. p. 86. ISBN 978-1-59420-608-5.
- Beirich, Heidi; Moser, Bob (31 December 2003). "Northwestern University Psychology Professor J. Michael Bailey Looks into Queer Science". Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved 15 October 2022.
- ^ Klein, Julie M. (May 2004). Ethical minefields: The sex that would be science. Seed Magazine, May/June 2004
- Krasny, Michael (August 22, 2007). Transgender Theories. Forum with Michael Krasny, KQED
- ^ Roughgarden, Joan (June 4, 2004). "Twist In The Tale Of Two Genders". Times Higher Education. No. 1643, p. 20.
- Marcus, Jon (August 1, 2003). Transsexuals Protest. Times Higher Education, p. 13
- Holden, Constance (July 18, 2003). Transsexuality Treatise Triggers Furor., Science/AAAS) mirrored at
- Staff report (June 25, 2003). Trans Group Attacks New Book on 'Queens.' Windy City Times
- McCloskey, Deirdre (November 2003). Queer Science: A data-bending psychologist confirms what he already knew about gays and transsexuals. Reason, November 2003
- Denny, Dallas (December 13, 2004). Viewpoint: Why the Bailey Controversy Is Important. Archived 2008-07-20 at the Wayback Machine Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004
- Park, Pauline (May 30, 2003). Sympathy, But Finding Pathology. Gay City News
- Green J (2003). Bailey's wick. PlanetOut
- Surkan, K (2007). Transsexuals Protest Academic Exploitation. In Lillian Faderman, Yolanda Retter, Horacio Roque Ramírez, eds. Great Events From History: Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Events, 1848–2006. pages 111–114. Salem Press ISBN 978-1-58765-263-9
- The Ups and Downs of J. Michael Bailey. Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004, pp. 53–54.
- Mundy, Liza (March 23, 2003). Codes of Behavior. Washington Post
- Bockting, Walter O. (2005). "Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality. ". Journal of Sex Research. 42 (3): 267–270. doi:10.1080/00224490509552281. S2CID 216088335.
- ^ Letellier, Patrick (16 March 2004). "Group rescinds honor for disputed book". Gay.com. Archived from the original on 5 May 2008. Retrieved 26 October 2022.
- "Letter to New York Times, Sept 20, 2007". Press Room. Lambda Literary Foundation. 20 September 2007. Archived from the original on 17 May 2008. Retrieved 26 October 2022.
- Wilson, Robin. "Transsexual 'Subjects' Complain About Professor's Research Methods." The Chronicle of Higher Education 25 July 2003, Vol. 49, Issue 46. "The book contains numerous observations and reports of interviews with me", C. Anjelica Kieltyka, one of the transsexual women, wrote in a letter this month to C. Bradley Moore, Northwestern's vice president for research. She added: "I did not receive, nor was I asked to sign, an informed-consent document."
- ^ Singal, Jesse (30 December 2015). "Why Some of the Worst Attacks on Social Science Have Come From Liberals". New York. Retrieved 1 January 2016.
- Ritchie, Don; Shopes, Linda (2003). Oral History Excluded from IRB Review: Application of the Department of Health and Human Services Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects at 45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A to Oral History Interviewing. Oral History Association. Archived from the original on 17 January 2008. Retrieved 31 December 2008.. See also An Update on the Exclusion of Oral History from IRB Review (March 2004). Archived 2008-01-15 at the Wayback Machine
External links
- Men Trapped in Men's Bodies Chapter 9 of the book in HTML (about autogynephilia)
- The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism (2003) The full book, for purchase or free PDF download
- Book Controversy FAQ by author J. Michael Bailey
- The World according to J. Michael Bailey inside "The Man who would be Queen: The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism" by Madeline H. Wyndzen