If you notice, the most prominent individuals peddling gender variance as sexual perversion were post-war baby boom white males. Why is that important you ask? simple, they were brought up under the same repressive society which influenced many of us who were born close to that period. Hence, there is very little chance that their prejudices would not have colored their work and points of view.

Here are their birth years:

Blanchard: 1945
Zucker: 1950
Lawrence: 1950
Bailey: 1957

For example, at the CAMH you had Zucker trying to "repair" gender variant kids and when that didn't work the next step might have been to see to Blanchard for more treatment to serve as guinea pigs for his theorizing. Bailey, Lawrence, Zucker et al are all cut from the same cloth and were raised in an era that would not see anything positive coming from gender variance. I know because I grew up just like them except I needed to accept myself as a trans person and was able to break away from this type of thinking. Today this makes them anachronisms from a time when this difference was regarded as an aberration. It is why they have failed in their efforts; the world has simply moved on.

Using stereotypical models of what men and women were supposed to be like, they maligned anything that fell outside of these accepted norms. Bailey's book, for example, is full of mysoginistic caricatures of women that today would look laughable to a millennial. This is one of the reasons it has rightfully been ridiculed as not being a work of science.


Popular posts from this blog

Language matters

One transgender woman's take on AGP

Arousal and what it means