The Man Who Would Be Queen 4412934 225955814 2008-07-16T05:04:44Z Skoojal 6202889 only fair to add this {{POV|date=May 2008}} '''''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism''''' is a 2003 book by [[J. Michael Bailey]], published by [[Joseph Henry Press]].<ref name="jhp">Bailey, J. Michael (2003). ''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''. Joesph Henry Press, ISBN 978-0309084185</ref> In it, Bailey reviews evidence that male [[homosexuality]] is congenital and a result of heredity and prenatal environment. He also reviews evidence for the theory that there are two forms of [[transsexualism]], one that is an extreme type of homosexuality and one that is an expression of a [[paraphilia]] known as [[autogynephilia]]. The book aroused considerable controversy, and led to a formal investigation by [[Northwestern University]], where Bailey was Chair of the Psychology Department until shortly before the conclusion of the investigation. Northwestern University has stated that his departure from the department chairmanship was not linked to the investigation. Bailey insists that he did nothing wrong and that the criticism of him was motivated by the desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about transsexualism, especially [[autogynephilia]].<ref name="McCarthyism">{{cite web | title = Academic McCarthyism | url=http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 | accessdate = 2007-05-15 }}</ref> ==Summary== The book is divided into three sections: ''The Boy Who Would Be Princess'', ''The Man He Might Become'', and ''Women Who Once Were Boys''. The book 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: "In spring of 1996 Leslie Ryan came to my Northwestern University office to seek yet another opinion."<ref name=Bailey16">{{cite web|url=16|title=The Man Who Would be Queen|last=Bailey|first=p|accessdate=2007-07-19}}</ref> Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist [[Kenneth Zucker]]'s work with boys who have a psychological condition called [[gender identity disorder]] (GID). Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to discuss young boys considered to have GID. This term is used to describe patients who exhibit a large amount of salient [[gender]]-atypical behavior such as [[cross-dressing]], boys preferring to play with dolls, identification with female characters in stories or movies. This section also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, [[sex assignment|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 a desire to identify as a male. The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood GID and male homosexuality later in life. In particular, he discusses whether homosexuality is a congenitally or possibly even genetically related phenomenon. This includes references to his studies as well as those of neuroscientist [[Simon LeVay]] and geneticist [[Dean Hamer]]. He also discusses the behavior of gay men and its typically masculine and feminine qualities. In the third section, Bailey summarized a taxonomy of male-to-female transsexualism that was proposed by [[Ray Blanchard]]. According to Blanchard, there are two types of male-to-female transsexualism: one is an extreme form of male homosexuality, and the other is motivated by [[autogynephilia| an erotic interest in being female]].<ref>Blanchard, R., Clemmensen, L. J., & Steiner, B. W. (1987). Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16,'' 139–152.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria. ''Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 177,'' 616–623.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18,'' 315–334.</ref> Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs. ==Controversy== {{seealso|Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory|Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory controversy}} Largely because of a single chapter<ref>[http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/autogynephilia.htm Autogynephilia, J. Michael Bailey]</ref> in its third section, the book and its author have been surrounded by controversy. The major point of contention is [[Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory]], which is presented favorably. This theory categorizes transsexuals into one of two types labeled "[[Autogynephilia|autogynephilic]] transsexuals" and "[[homosexual transsexual]]s." The basic idea is that these two subtypes of transwomen transition to female for different reasons, both related to sex: * because they are attracted to the image of their own feminized body (autogynephiles), or * because they are homosexual and attracted to heterosexual men (homosexual transsexuals). Bailey's prominent critics and defenders both include peers in [[sexology]]. Bailey's response was a lecture at the 2003 [[International Academy of Sex Research]] titled "Identity politics as a hindrance to scientific truth."<ref>{{cite web | last = Bailey | first =J. Michael | authorlink = J. Michael Bailey | title = Identity Politics as a Hindrance to Scientific Truth | publisher = Int. Acad. Sex Research | date = 2003 | url = http://www.iasr.org/meeting/2003/abstracts2003.pdf | format = pdf | accessdate = 2007-03-16}}</ref> [[Eli Coleman]], head of the [[Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association]] has described the book as "bad science" and an "unfortunate setback" of his own theories on transsexualism.{{Fact|date=May 2008}} Clinician Walter Bockting wrote that "the book fails to offer a balanced and well-cited review of the scientific literature," although this omission is common in books intended for a non-technical audience (Bockting 2005).{{Fact|date=May 2008}} On the book's jacket, in contrast, Anne Lawrence, praised the book as "wonderful," and neuroscientist [[Simon LeVay]] called it "absolutely splendid." <!--Why are the critics described with professional titles but the supporters are given no identification other than their name?--> Some GLBT rights groups have spoken out about Bailey's claims in various publications, including the [[Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] (GLAAD), the [[National Gay and Lesbian Task Force]], [[GenderPAC]], as well as three prominent [[transwomen]]: * [[computer science|computer scientist]] [[Lynn Conway]] compared Bailey's work to Nazi propaganda and consulted with four individuals who later complained to Northwestern University about research impropriety by Bailey. Conway wrote in her own letter to Northwestern that Bailey grossly violated principles of research conduct "by conducting intimate research observations on human subjects without telling them that they were objects of the study." Two subjects noted were not involved in the book and the two others were aware, by their own letters of complaint, that their experiences would be used for publication.<ref name=carrey /> * [[Anjelica Kieltyka]], to whom Bailey refers in his book by the pseudonym Cher {{Fact|date=May 2008}} * writer and [[consumer activism|consumer activist]] [[Andrea James]]. James' website includes numerous pages attacking Bailey, his book, his family, his friends, and his professional associates. One of these pages, which has now been removed, included pictures of Bailey's young children and placed offensive sexual messages beneath them.<ref>{{cite web | last = Bailey | first = J. Michael | title = Andrea James took pictures of my children off of my website | url=http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/Andrea%20James.pdf | format = pdf | accessdate = 2007-03-07}}</ref> James subsequently apologised for her behavior. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/bailey-children.html|title=A Note Regarding Bailey's Children|first=Andrea|last=James|accessdate=2008-16-07}}</ref> Originally, the [[Lambda Literary Foundation]] nominated the book as a finalist in the [[transgender]] award category for 2003. Transpeople immediately protested the nomination and gathered thousands of petition signatures in just a few days. Under pressure from the petition, LLF's judges examined the book more closely, decided that it was [[transphobia|transphobic]], and removed it from their list of finalists.<ref>{{cite web | last = Letellier | first = Patrick | title = Group rescinds honor for disputed book | publisher = gay.com | date = 2004-03-16 | url = http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004/03/16/3 | accessdate = 2007-03-16}}</ref> Many of Bailey's critics not only attacked his book, but also questioned his personal integrity. Two of the transwomen in his book and several organizations accused him of several ethical breaches in his work. Bailey has denied that he behaved unethically.<ref name="McCarthyism">{{cite web | title = Academic McCarthyism | url=http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 | accessdate = 2007-05-15 }}</ref> In 2003, the federal DHHS issued a clarification which formally states that taking [[oral history|oral histories]], interviewing people (as if for a piece of journalism), and collecting anecdotes does not constitute [[Institutional Review Board|IRB]]-qualified research. A male-to-female transsexual person who was interviewed for his book said that Bailey had sex with her while she was his research subject. This became the subject of a sexual misconduct complaint. She has refused to offer details or discuss the accusation, which Bailey has denied.<ref>[http://chronicle.com/weekly/v50/i17/17a01702.htm "Northwestern U. Psychologist Accused of Having Sex With Research Subject."] [[The Chronicle of Higher Education]], 19 December 2003</ref> According to findings by Dr. Dreger, reported in the New York Times, the sexual misconduct allegation came 5 years after the fact and was unsupported by evidence. Dated e-mail exchanges between Bailey and his ex-wife demonstrate that Bailey was at the home of his ex-wife looking after their children at the time specified by the accusation.<ref name=carrey /> Following an appearance by Bailey on [[CBS]] ''[[60 Minutes]]'',<ref name="stahl">Stahl, Lesley (March 12, 2006). The Science of Sexual Orientation. ''[[60 Minutes]]''</ref> ''[[The Advocate]]'' published an [[op-ed|opinion piece]] that asserted, "Bailey’s insistence on his authority in defining what does and doesn’t qualify as gay and his dedication to discovering a 'cause' for gayness is only temperamentally different from those who insist on finding a 'cure.'"<ref name="ehrenstein">Ehrenstein, David (April 6, 2006). [http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid29121.asp Kinder, gentler homophobia]. ''[[The Advocate]]''</ref> In 2006, the ''Chicago Free Press'' (a GLBT free weekly) announced it would no longer accept ads for studies conducted by Bailey. In an editorial entitled "Bad Science," the newspaper said it would not allow itself to be used "to further the dubious agenda of someone who believes he should not be held accountable to our community."<ref name="badscience">Staff editorial (August 9, 2006). "Bad Science." ''Chicago Free Press''</ref> The ''Free Press'' editor told ''[[Editor & Publisher]]'' that an e-mail blast to a listserv from Bailey himself was the source of most letters protesting the decision.<ref name="fitzgerald">Fitzgerald, Mark (August 15, 2006). Chicago Gay Paper Nixes Ad From Controversial Sex Researcher.</ref> Journalist Jim D'Entremont countered that "Bailey's critics follow the familiar patterns of ideologues seeking to discredit scientists whose findings they deem politically wrong."<ref name'dentremont">D'Entremont, Jim (October 2006). [http://www.guidemag.com/magcontent/invokemagcontent.cfm?ID=955163E2-B582-4567-A526BD367790BF8D Political Science.] ''The Guide''</ref> ==Academic freedom== The controversy surrounding Bailey's book has been cited as an example of infringement of [[Academic freedom|academic]] and [[intellectual freedom]] and [[freedom of speech]]: Northwestern University ethicist Alice Dreger wrote a "history" of the controversy.<ref name = Dreger>Dreger, A. D. (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, vol 37,'' 366-421.</ref> According to the New York Times, she later said, "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... The bottom line is that they tried to ruin this guy, and they almost succeeded."<ref name=carrey>"Criticism of a Gender Theory, and a Scientist Under Siege," by Benedict Carrey. ''[[New York Times]]'', August 21, 2007 [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html]</ref> Bailey called the two years following its publication "the hardest of my life."<ref name=carrey /> Alternatives to Dreger's view are also presented in 23 commentaries in the same issue of the ''Archives of Sexual Behavior''.<ref>''Archives of Sexual Behavior'', volume 37, special section: commentaries on "controversial paper", pp. 422–510.</ref> ==References== {{Reflist|2}} ==External links== *[http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/controversy.htm Book Controversy FAQ] by author J. Michael Bailey *[http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html J. Michael Bailey investigation] via [[Lynn Conway]] *[http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/bailey-blanchard-lawrence.html Clearinghouse on Bailey's book] via Transsexual Road Map *[http://www.transkids.us/review.html Book Review: The Man Who Would Be Queen] - S. Alejandra Velasquez *[http://genderpsychology.org/autogynephilia/j_michael_bailey/index.html 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 *[http://www.gender.org.uk/chstnuts/queen0.htm The 'Science' Behind Autogynephilia: A Critique of "The Man Who Would Be Queen"] [[Category:2003 books|Man who would be Queen]] [[Category:Sexology|Man who would be Queen]] [[Category:Transgender and medicine|Man who would be Queen]] [[Category:Sexual orientation and medicine]]