Skip to main content

The man who would be queen





If I were going to write a serious and scholarly book on a topic I would certainly be careful about the type of cover I chose.

Someone should have told this to Michael Bailey back in 2003 when he decided to dust off Ray Blanchard’s controversial ideas and put them to print in his own words. Bailey wholeheartedly espoused the Autogynephilia theory and expanded on it in his book which immediately raised the ire of the transgender community.

If I were to write a book on African Americans I would not feature a white man in black face. Similarly, if I were to write a book on homosexuality I would not feature a caricature of a limp wristed effeminate dandy either. Bailey chose to show the hairy calves of a man teetering in a pair of women’s pumps and call the book “The Man who would be Queen - The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism”.

This choice of cover acted as the red flag being waved at the bull. You shouldn’t be that surprised if it then charged.

The entire Blanchard school is not among my favorites but at least Anne Lawrence (who herself transitioned) had the good sense not to do as Bailey did. Of course Lawrence is in the unenviable position of having to defend a theory that accuses her of having a paraphilic abnormality. Why make things even worse for yourself.

Bailey was vilified by the likes of Andrea James and Lynn Conway who rightly saw the book as a less than scholarly attempt to paint transgender women as having a sexually fueled mental illness. Whether the treatment Bailey received went beyond an acceptable limit I cannot say but I know that his choice of cover plus the contents of the book were clearly an attempt to be controversial and adversarial. If he thought otherwise would have made Bailey a complete imbecile; he clearly knew what he was doing.

The Blanchard cabal is not the picture of political correctness and they are not as scientifically professional as they think themselves to be. As I have pointed here before many times the work is like a swiss cheese (full of gaping holes) and is primarily based on selective hand picking from the psychoanalysis of people intending to transition. If they didn’t get a response they wanted from a patient they accused them of lying.

Zagria (of Gender Variance Who’s Who fame) has an interesting beef with them in that when she went to the CAMH institute for treatment she was refused on the basis that she didn’t fit one of their two typologies. She would have been a late transitioning gay male with a husband which somehow didn’t compute. Zagria transitioned elsewhere and is strongly opposed to AGP as a concept.

All work claiming to be scholarly is traditionally non-controversial and examines other possible origins most especially when there is so much unknown territory here. The fact that Bailey ignored this basic approach speaks volumes about the quality (or lack thereof) of his final product.

Comments

  1. That's definitely a cover and a title to put you off approaching this as a scholarly scientific work. I doubt if I'll be putting it on my Amazon Wish List.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wouldn't bother with it Susie but if you are at all interested in understanding where the Blanchard group sits on this issue you might want to.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.

the pseudoscience behind gender dysphoria

The real science as to what causes gender dysphoria still awaits.

Harry Benjamin was on to something except he didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up his suspicions hence, like a true scientist, he negated to draw conclusions. His hunch, based on treating so many patients over his lifetime, was that one is born with a predisposition to be gender dysphoric.

However, with inconclusive brain scans and no DNA marker (as of yet) we are left with believing the word of people who need help and only want to lead happy and productive lives.

The best we have been able to muster since Benjamin's death in 1986 was to amass statistics on who gets a boner imagining themselves as a woman which is in equal parts pathetic and disappointing. For this is not really science at all but is instead playing with interview data that doesn't point to anything definitive or conclusive. I have dealt with this problem at great length in my blog.

The whole thing started with Kurt Freund's obses…