Stephen Mautner is an American publishing executive responsible for fact-checking and releasing one of the most transphobic books ever written, The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey.
Background
Stephen M. Mautner was born on April 13, 1952. Mautner earned a bachelor’s from Brown University and a master’s degree from Johns Hopkins University. Mautner met spouse Ellen in Chicago and married there in 1986. They moved to Rockville, Maryland in 1989 for Mautner’s new job, and Mautner joined the National Academies around 1991. The Joseph Henry Press imprint began operation in 1992. After it was disbanded in 2008, Mautner remained Executive Editor of the National Academies Press (NAP), publisher for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington, D.C. Mautner has helped develop online projects to make those works more accessible to general audiences.
Anti-transgender activity
Mautner was responsible for fact-checking and publishing psychologist J. Michael Bailey’s 2003 book The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism.
Mautner edited and published what is widely considered the most unscientific and deliberately offensive book on gender diversity since Janice Raymond’s 1979 screed The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male. Mautner was completely surprised by the 2003 response, which shows how poorly he handled his editing responsibilities on this controversial book.
After selling about 4,200 print copies, The Man Who Would Be Queen went out of print in 2008. It remained available for purchase as a PDF on the National Academies site.
The question of how this salacious bigotry got past Steve Mautner and got published by the National Academies Press remains unanswered. National Academies employees Mautner and Barbara Kline Pope refuse to disclose who did the “peer review,” because it’s clear Mautner’s choices were Bailey cronies. In the wake of the 2003 protests, Mautner even defended this book as a “responsible work.”
Open letter from Stephen Mautner (2003)
On 24 June 2003, Mautner sent out the following open letter. See below for Mautner’s letter as a PDF. Notations and links in the text are mine.
In March of 2003 the Joseph Henry Press published J. Michael Bailey’s The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism, a work intended to inform general audiences about one scholar’s efforts to understand aspects of homosexuality and gender identity within a psychological framework. Some readers have vehemently disagreed with the book, calling it defamatory and offensive to the transgender community. For example, they contest the implication that most transsexuals fit the categories described by Bailey.
Overall, the book has been greeted with a wide range of responses, from high praise to harsh criticism. Kirkus Reviews called the book “a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition” (January 2003). Publishers Weekly said “Bailey writes with assuredness that often makes difficult, abstract material–the relationship between sexual orientation and gender affect, the origins of homosexuality and the theoretical basis of how we discuss sexuality–comprehensible. He also, especially in his portraits of the women and men he writes about, displays a deep empathy that is frequently missing from scientific studies of sexuality” (April 2003). However, the same review in Publishers Weekly goes on to say that “Bailey tends towards overreaching, unsupported generalizations.” And a reviewer in Frontiers, a Southern California gay news magazine, states that the author “doesn’t need to inject his biases as often as he does” (March 2003). A sense of the polarity of opinion about the book can also be derived from a scan of the reader responses to the work on Amazon.com, where among the forty-three responses posted on June13, 2003, twenty-seven gave the book a 1-star (lowest) rating and eleven gave it a 5-star (highest) rating, with only five responses in between.
The Joseph Henry Press (JHP), publisher of Bailey’s book, is an imprint of the National Academies Press engaged in publishing books on science, engineering, and medicine for popular audiences. JHP books are individually authored works, each carrying a notice that the opinions expressed are solely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academies. JHP follows clear decision rules for selecting books for publication and for scientific review of manuscripts. The work in question was reviewed as a well-crafted and responsible work on a difficult topic, reflecting one approach to a legitimate avenue of scholarship and research.
None of us involved in the publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen imagined the extent of the controversy that its publication would trigger. We deeply regret the fact that some have found the book harmful or offensive. Our intention in publishing it was certainly not to offend any individual or group, but rather to offer insight into how one scientist has arrived at his views on certain aspects of sex and human behavior.
The appropriate response to this endeavor, we believe, is not to silence the scientist or to censor the expression of his findings and opinions. Rather we hope that the publication will inspire a productive discussion about future directions and methodologies in research on issues of gender and sexuality, and thereby promote the proper course of future scientific investigation on this important but very sensitive topic.
Sincerely, [unsigned]
Stephen Mautner Executive Editor The National Academies Press The Joseph Henry Press
Below is selected correspondence about Mautner’s editorial choices.
My response of 16 July 2003
Mr. Mautner:
I have recently read an open letter with your name affixed regarding your responsibility for the publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey. The version I read was electronic and was unsigned and undated.
Please provide me with verification that you are responsible for this letter, as well as the date(s) it was written and released by JHP, as these dates will be important in understanding what you knew about Professor Bailey at the time you wrote the letter.
Thank you.
Mautner’s reply of 18 July 2003:
The date of the open letter was June 24, 2003. I will ask that the date be added to the letter.
Sincerely,
Stephen Mautner Executive Editor The National Academies Press/Joseph Henry Press
2 August 2003 letter to Mautner from prominent trans scientists
August 2, 2003
Stephen Mautner, Executive Editor The National Academies Press The Joseph Henry Press 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
Dear Mr. Mautner,
We are writing in response to your recent open letter regarding your publication of the Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey. You are probably now aware that several individuals who were subjects of Bailey’s research have filed formal complaints with his institution to the effect that he apparently did not seek review or approval by Northwestern’s Institutional Review Board for the research involving human subjects described in detail in his book. In particular, they were not informed that they were subjects of his research nor did they sign consent forms as is required by federal regulations governing protection of human research subjects.
Federal regulations define research as “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge”. Human subject “means a living individual about whom an investigator conducting research obtains data through intervention or interaction with the individual”, where interaction “includes communication or interpersonal contact between investigator and subject”. The Joseph Henry Press describes Professor Bailey’s work as based on his own research, and the book contains detailed interviews with human subjects.
In recent years publishers of scientific research involving human subjects have established procedures to assure that research studies whose results they publish have complied with ethical standards for the treatment of human subjects, and that authors have stipulated in writing that the conduct of their research was in compliance with those legally mandated standards. For example, instructions to authors for Nature Genetics state:
In cases where a study involves the use of live animals or human subjects, the Methods section of the manuscript should include a statement that all experiments were performed in compliance with the relevant laws and institutional guidelines, and should identify the institutional committee(s) that have approved the experiments. A statement should also be included that informed consent was obtained for any experimentation with human subjects. Referees may be asked to comment specifically on any cases in which concerns arise.
Similar requirements are adhered to by other major publishers of scientific research, and we have appended the guidelines for several publications, including JAMA, the New England Journal of Medicine, Science, and journals of the American Psychological Association which has its own comprehensive statement of Ethical Principles that provides for the protection of human subjects.
In your letter you say that “Our intention in publishing it was … to offer insight into how one scientist has arrived at his views on certain aspects of sex and human behavior”, and that “we hope that the publication will inspire a productive discussion about future directions and methodologies in research on gender and sexuality…” In regard to how Professor Bailey “arrived at his views” and “discussion about … methodologies”, we have two questions to ask of you.
1. Does the National Academies Press – Joseph Henry Press require that authors affirm in writing that their research involving human subjects has been approved by an appropriate institutional review committee and that informed consent was obtained from human subjects involved in the research?
2. If such a policy is in place for the Joseph Henry Press, did J. Michael Bailey stipulate to having adhered to that policy?
If you do not have a policy that requires authors to stipulate that they have adhered to ethical standards for research involving human subjects, we strongly urge you to develop one along the lines of other publishers of scientific research. Note that Genetics Nature invites comment from reviewers in cases where there may be concern about the ethical use of human subjects. It is clearly inappropriate for the National Academies to publish and promote the results of research that fails to conform to federally mandated requirements for the protection of human subjects in research.
We appreciate your assistance in answering our inquiry and in addressing these serious concerns about the conduct of the research in question.
Sincerely,
Barbara Nash., Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics University of Utah
Lynn Conway, Ph.D. Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Emerita University of Michigan Member, National Academy of Engineering
Deirdre McCloskey, Ph.D. UIC Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, and English University of Illinois at Chicago Tinbergen Professor of Philosophy, Economics, and Art and Cultural Studies, Erasmus University of Rottterdam
Ben Barress, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Neurobiology and Developmental Biology Stanford University
Joan Roughgarden, Ph.D. Professor of Biological Sciences Stanford University
c: Bruce Alberts, President, the National Academy of Sciences Harvey V. Fineberg, President, the Institute of Medicine
Thank you for adding the release date to your June 24 letter regarding your responsibility for bringing out the Bailey book under the Joseph Henry Press imprint. Your letter states:
“JHP follows clear decision rules… for scientific review of manuscripts. The work in question was reviewed as a well-crafted and responsible work.”
As you may know, this was not the expert assessment of Dr. John Bancroft, the Director of the Kinsey Institute, who stood up immediately after a Bailey presentation in July and told a lecture hall full of sex researchers that Bailey’s book “is not science.”
Please provide the names and credentials of those who participated in the scientific review of this manuscript and came to the conclusion it was well-crafted and responsible.
I look forward to learning the names of the scientific reviewers you selected who disagree with Dr. Bancroft.
Thank you in advance.
cc: Suzanne Woolsey
My letter of 21 August 2003:
Mr. Mautner:
I have not yet received a reply to my August 12 email requesting the names and credentials of those who participated in the “scientific review” of J. Michael Bailey’s manuscript and came to the conclusion it was “well-crafted and responsible” (see below).
I already have my copy of the dismissive form letter from Dr. Woolsey advising everyone with opposing views to present and publish evidence and reasoning. I’d appreciate the courtesy of a personal reply with this evidence so I can do just that.
cc: Suzanne Woolsey, Bruce Alberts, Harvey V. Fineberg
Dr. Dana Beyer’s correspondence of 30 July 2003 with Mautner
Dear Mr. Mautner:
[…] I recently discovered that your press was located here in DC, and I would like the opportunity to visit with you to discuss J Michael Bailey’s recently published book, “The Man Who Would Be Queen.”
Thank you very much. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Dana Beyer, M.D.
Mautner’s reply on 7 August 2003
Dear Dr. Beyer,
I apologize for the delay in responding.
Given the deluge of mail we have received concerning Dr. Bailey’s book and our wish to catalog the responses, I would much prefer it if you could submit your comments in writing.
Sincerely, Stephen Mautner
My follow-up with Mr. Mautner one year after he brought out The Man Who Would Be Queen
15 March 2004
Mr. Mautner:
Lest you think we have forgotten about you and your JHP team, I wanted to update you on the J. Michael Bailey situation and your historical role in this matter.
Unlike you, the Lambda Literary Foundation had the integrity to admit last week they had made an “unprecedented” error in their initial assessment of The Man Who Would Be Queen. Though it was a “humbling experience” according to their Executive Director, they had the integrity to withdraw support for the book when it became clear to them it was not science but propaganda in service of the neo-eugenics movement.
I also wanted to update you on an ongoing problem at Amazon.com. As many lazy editors and publishers are wont to do, you cited Amazon.com reviews in your 24 June 2003 open letter as an accurate gauge of response to this book:
http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/bailey-reviews.html
Publishers increasingly use these unconfirmed reviews edited by an unnamed editor as evidence about a book’s reception.
“As of June 13, 2003 there were 27 1-star (lowest) ratings, and 11 5-star (highest) ratings, with only 5 in-between.”
Since Amazon has rewritten history by removing 18 of the reviews you cite in March, you need to revise your letter:
“As of June 13, 2003 there were 9 1-star (lowest) ratings, and 11 5-star (highest) ratings, with only 5 in-between.”
This new statistic suggests that the world is evenly split on this book. That does not reflect the 1300+ signatures gathered in a few days from people in 35 countries who protested the book, or the consensus of almost every professional organization that deals with gender variance.
Clearly, Amazon needs to be more transparent in the process, as do editors like JHP and publishing trade groups like Lambda Literary Foundation. These organizations are covering book promotion with a façade of objectivity and editorial rigor that simply does not exist.
As I have said all along, this is being waged as a war of propaganda and not a science fight. Once again, we have more evidence.
I can assure you that you will be held personally accountable for what is the most spectacular misstep of your career as an editor, and we will most certainly get to the bottom of who gave you the go-ahead on this book. I’d bet money they are listed here:
This is going to be painstaking and methodical, and no stone will go unturned in determining who allowed this book to be published by the National Academies Press.
Additional Mautner information
Here’s a rather inaccurate description from 2004 detailing what Mautner does (emphasis mine):
Stephen Mautner, executive editor of Joseph Henry Press, an imprint of the National Academies Press, was the fourth panelist. The Joseph Henry Press was founded to look for authors outside the national academies and to contract with individual authors to write books on science topics for general audiences. Editors look for serious scientific books that will have commercial success. Mautner sees a great future for work that takes content from the National Academies and massages it into a form accessible to a wider audience. How do editors at the Joseph Henry Press hire writers? Currently, they recruit very few book writers because they can only award contracts to six or eight authors a year. However, Mautner said that they are willing and eager to give writers who have a compelling record of excellent journalism a chance to write their first book.
Mautner sent his children to St. Albans, an exclusive Washington DC-based private prep school, using the money he made disseminating Bailey’s tripe.
Anyone with additional information on Steve Mautner’s responsibility for the review and publication of Bailey’s defamatory book is encouraged to contact the author of this site.
According to anti-trans activist Alice Dreger, as of August 2006, the book had sold about 4200 copies and had about 900,000 visits to the electronic version.
References
Weintraub, Judith (April 27, 1997). Intertwining Roots.Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/1997/04/27/worlds-apart/1b438573-c351-4711-b0b3-734fa7770c06/?utm_term=.42613ccc11be
(Stephen Mautner to Michael Bailey, copy to Alice Dreger, p.e.c., August 11, 2006).
Media
CPNAS (May 7, 2013). Stephen Mautner. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Ya6nNA5jk
Suzanne Haley “Sue” Woolsey was born in 1941. Woolsey is spouse of James Woolsey, who, among other things, served as Jimmy Carter’s first director of the CIA. James Woolsey is also a notable neoconservative, reaching that philosophy via a circuitous route through the corridors of liberal power.
Suzanne Woolsey’s 1970 dissertation was titled “Effects of experimenter race and segregated or desegregated school experience on some aspects of the social interaction of white and negro children.” Interestingly, experimenter effect is one of the chief scientific criticisms of the methodology used by Bailey, Ray Blanchard, and Anne Lawrence.
During the Carter Administration Woolsey served in high level positions in the Office of Management and Budget. During the Reagan Administration Woolsey worked outside of the government.
Woolsey began work at the National Academy of Sciences in 1989 as Executive Director of the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences, responsible for oversight of all of the boards in those fields. Later Woolsey became chief operating officer of the NAS and then Chief Communications Officer whose responsibilities included National Academies Press and Joseph Henry Press.
Woolsey’s canned response
Woolsey sent the following form letter to anyone who wrote to express concern about the lack of science in J. Michael Bailey’s The Man Who Would Be Queen. I received my copy on 22 May 2003.
We have received your message about the book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, by J. Michael Bailey, and I am responding on behalf of the National Academies. We appreciate knowing of your concerns and recognize that the contents of this book are controversial. The copyright page of the book carries the following notice: “Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this volume are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences or its affiliated institutions.” This statement applies to all books published by the Joseph Henry Press. Joseph Henry Press publications are not reports of the National Academies, but are individually authored works on topics related to science, engineering, and medicine.
In our opinion, the best response to writing with which one disagrees is more writing. Those who hold views contrary to those expressed in this book are encouraged to present and publish the evidence and reasoning in support of their conclusions.
Sincerely, Suzanne H. Woolsey, Ph.D. Chief Communications Officer
After the book controversy
In January 2004, Woolsey became a director of Fluor Corporation, which has $1.6 billion in Iraq related contracts. Woolsey also served as a director of the Institute for Defense Analyses which also has war interests, and received modest compensation for that role according to the article.
The Woolseys’ overlapping affiliations are part of a growing pattern in Washington in which individuals play key roles in quasi-governmental organizations advising officials on major policy issues but also are involved with private businesses in related fields. Such activities generally are not covered by conflict of interest laws or ethics rules. They underscore an insiders network in which contacts and relationships developed inside the government can meld with individual financial interests.
Suzanne Woolsey is also affiliated with other firms, including the Paladin Capital Group, a Washington venture capital firm in which Woolsey’s spouse is a partner. Suzanne Woolsey did not respond to messages left at Paladin and at Fluor.
References
Roche, WF (8 August 2004). Private, Public Roles Overlap in Washington. Los Angeles Times. [archive]
Holloway J, Boyette L. (27 January 2004.). Fluor Adds Suzanne H. Woolsey to Board of Directors. Fluor website. http://investor.fluor.com/visitors/print_release.cfm?ReleaseID=127565 [archive]
Clemons SC (8 August 2004). Woolsey’s web: Structure and corruption in Iraq. The Washington Note. http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000015.html [archive]
Ted Barlow (born 1974) is a former J. Michael Bailey student at Northwestern University who wrote a biased undergraduate paper on transsexualism. Barlow’s paper is a good indication of how Bailey teaches students harmful ideas about gender identity and expression, sexuality, and attraction to transgender people.
Bailey’s exploitative undergraduate human sexuality course was permanently canceled by Northwestern in 2011.
Background
Barlow attended Northwestern from 1992–1996, earning a BS in psychology in 1996. His senior honors thesis was done with J. Michael Bailey, where Barlow served as a sort of wing man as they trolled Chicago bars for attractive young trans women to “research.”
He earned an MA in psychology from the University of Chicago in 1998 and an MBA from UT Austin in 2008. He has held various roles in the legal services industry in Texas.
Barlow had an extensive online presence as a blogger prior to going into legal services. He has since tried to minimize his connections to past published work.
Resources
Blogspot (blogspot.com)
tedbarlow.blogspot.com
A few things that I learned studying transsexuals [archive]
The legal uncertainties reflect widespread puzzlement about the basic science. What is transsexualism’s connection to homosexuality? Does it signify mental illness? The American Psychiatric Association long ago (1973) eliminated homosexuality from its list of mental disorders, but its fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) still lists “gender identity disorder,” also mystifying to many people. Why does it cause thousands of Americans to powerfully desire membership in the opposite sex, leading some subset of this population to undergo transformative genital surgery?
A good recently published guide to all these questions is The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism, by J. Michael Bailey, 46, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University who teaches an undergraduate course in human sexuality. The book is mostly about effeminate boys and men and how they got that way, but its concluding chapters zero in on the world of transsexuals–not all of whom were effeminate. The book has ignited a firestorm of protest from some transsexuals.
This despite the fact that Bailey, himself a standard-model male heterosexual, is warmly sympathetic to gays and transsexuals and argues persuasively that for the great majority of individuals taking the male-to-female route, the decision is rational.
The size of the transsexual population is itself a matter of controversy, and their propagandists endlessly seek to inflate the numbers. DSM-IV estimates that 1 in 30,000 males (and 1 in 100,000 females) opts for the surgery. Bailey’s estimate is 1 in 12,000 males, implying 8,000 gender-crossers now living in the country.
Transsexual Lynn Conway–who has been a computer scientist at IBM and is a professor emeritus at the University of Michigan–is now an activist for the cause. She says the figure is 30,000 to 40,000.
But the transsexuals’ attack on the Bailey book is not based on his population estimates. The main point of the protests is Bailey’s explanation of the roots of gender-crossing. Relying heavily on the work of Ray Blanchard, who heads the clinical sexology program at the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto, Bailey tells us that there are two different, quite distinct types of male-to-female transsexuals.
First is the “classic” homosexual type: the effeminate boy who, from early childhood, is profoundly convinced that he was meant to be a woman. A likely but still unproven interpretation of this feeling is that it traces back to an inadequate dose of male hormones six or seven weeks after conception. The result could be a young man sexually attracted to other men and gravitating toward a transsexual solution.
The second type bears the label “autogynephilia,” a clunky term invented by Blanchard, who coined it to describe that sizable fraction (perhaps half) of male-to-female transsexuals that he found to have a different version of gender identity disorder. They are erotically stimulated not by other men, and not primarily by women, but by the image of themselves as women. Except for their cross-dressing propensities, these transsexuals tend to lead rather ordinary heterosexual lives.
I spoke recently with an eminent transsexual who Bailey believes to be autogynephilic. Deirdre McCloskey, 61, is distinguished professor of the liberal arts and sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago. She is a quantitatively oriented Chicago-school economist, a huge fan of Milton Friedman, and a dazzling writer, who is also a professor in the university’s English and history departments. Until she underwent the sex change in the mid-1990s, her name was Donald McCloskey, and she was a cross-dresser with a wife and two grown kids.
It is Bailey’s impression that the first type–the homosexual gender-crossers–are relatively indifferent to his book and that the protest emanates mainly from the autogynephiles. It is possible to understand their rage. The Blanchard diagnosis is hard to live with: Cross-dressing strikes most Americans as ridiculous, and its specified erotic role only makes matters worse. McCloskey, for one, is furious about the book and told the Northwestern newspaper: “He’s saying ‘Look, they’re driven by sex, sex, sex. They’re men, men, men.'”
The Bailey book sheds some much-needed light on the topic of transsexualism. But it is not destined to end the debate, or the lawsuits. Expect this difficult topic to keep judges and equal-opportunity commissions busy for a long while to come.
References
Seligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). Transsexuals And the Law. Forbes http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/1013/068.html
The National Review is an American media organization. It is consistently anti-transgender in its coverage.
Drew Pinsky is an American physician who has covered issues related to trans and gender diverse people.
Background
David Drew Pinsky was born on September 4, 1958 in Pasadena, California to physician Morton Pinsky (1926–2009) and entertainer Helene Stanton (1925–2017).
After graduating from Polytechnic School in 1976, Pinsky earned a bachelor’s degree from Amherst College in 1980 and a medical degree from University of Southern California in 1984.
Pinsky had a longstanding goal of covering medical issues in the media. After about a decade of radio appearances, Pinsky’s radio show Loveline was syndicated in 1995. MTV premiered a television version in 1996, hosted by Pinsky and Adam Carolla. From 2007-2008 Pinsky hosted Dr. Drew Live. From 2015 to 2019, Pinsky co-hosted Dr. Drew Midday Live. Loveline continued until 2016.
Pinsky hosted several other TV programs, including Strictly Sex with Dr. Drew, Strictly Dr. Drew, Sex…with Mom and Dad, Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew, Sex Rehab with Dr. Drew, Dr. Drew On Call . Pinsky has made many cameos and is often sought for comment on medical issues, especially drug and alcohol use.
Pinsky and spouse Susan Sailer married on July 21, 1991 and had triplets Douglas, Jordan, and Paulina in 1992. Pinsky has had treatments for prostate cancer. Pinksy has espoused libertarian and sometimes conservative views.
Transgender coverage
Pinsky hosted the program “Transgender in America” on August 26-27 2015 on HLN. The show included Ian Harvie, Marci Bowers, Bamby Salcedo, and D’Lo.
In 2015, Pinsky invited anti-trans extremist Ben Shapiro and trans journalist Zoey Tur on an episode of Dr. Drew on Call to discuss an award won by Caitlyn Jenner. After Shapiro insulted trans people in general and Tur in particular, Tur told Shapiro “You should cut that out now, or you’ll go home in an ambulance.” Shapiro, visibly shaken, later threatened to file police reports and lawsuits, but nothing came of any of it. Pinsky later apologized to Shapiro.
Ennis, Dawn (August 26, 2015). Can Dr. Drew Capture the Trans Experience?The Advocate https://www.advocate.com/transgender/2015/08/26/can-dr-drew-capture-trans-experience
Robinson, Judah (August 26, 2015). Dr. Drew Says Special On Transgender Issues Was Inspired By Caitlyn Jenner. HuffPost https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dr-drew-special-transgender-caitlyn-jenner_n_55ddb666e4b04ae49705143e
Mary Kate Fain is an American publisher and anti-transgender extremist. Fain created gender critical projects Spinster and 4W and is co-host of Identity Crisis with Plebity cofounder Sasha White. Fain also jelped with the initial launch of Ovarit after r/gendercritical was banned from reddit.
Background
Mary Kate Fain was born in October 1992, one of six children born to Karen Marie Fain (1965–2015) and Michael L. Ozlek (born 1954).
Fain graduated from Phoenixville Area High School and earned a bachelor’s degree from Ithaca College in 2013. From 2016 to 2018, Fain founded and ran animal rights organization Liberation Philadelphia.
Fain’s concerns center around maintaining sex segregation in remaining institutions and in creating platforms that allow participants to express anti-trans opinions.
The New York Post is a conservative American media organization that publishes consistently anti-transgender content.
Background
The New York Evening Post was founded in 1801 by Alexander Hamilton.
In 1939, Dorothy Schiff bought control of the New York Post and installed spouse George Backer as publisher and president. The paper switched to a tabloid format in the 1940s under Backer. Schiff installed Ted Thackrey as editor, then married Thackrey after divorcing Backer. The paper was generally liberal through the 1940s. Thackrey and Schiff divorced following disagreements about whom to endorse for President in the 1948 election.
Schiff sold the Post to Rupert Murdoch in 1976, and the paper shifted to conservative coverage. Murdoch was forced to sell the paper in 1988 to comply with regulations about cross-ownership of media. After a series of owners who tried various changes in format and levels of sensationalism, the Post was repurchased in 1993 by Murdoch’s News Corporation after the FCC dave Murdoch a permanent waiver regarding cross-ownership.
The Post operates NYPost.com, gossip site PageSix.com (launched in print in 1977 and online in 2000), and entertainment site Decider.com (launched 2014). Due to extensive promotion of Donald Trump starting in the 1980s, the paper is reportedly Trump’s preferred newspaper.
The Post’s virulently homophobic coverage of the AIDS crisis in the 1980s led to the formation of GLAAD in 1985.
Contributors
Contributors who have published anti-trans content include Suzy Weiss, ex-trans activist “Chloe Cole” and conservative Meghan McCain. The Editorial Board has published dozens of anti-trans standalone pieces as well as many more mentions in opinion round-ups, drastically increasing their frequency starting in 2023.
Storey, Kate (Feb 12, 2020). The Secret History of Page Six.Esquire https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a30709872/page-six-gossip-history-new-york-post/
Editorial board ( Aug. 27, 2016). Team Obama’s new low in the name of ‘trans rights.’New York Post https://nypost.com/2016/08/27/forcing-doctors-to-operate-team-obamas-new-low-in-the-name-of-trans-rights/
Arora earned a bachelor’s degree from University of California, Irvine in 2010, followed by a master’s degrees from New York University in 2014 and Columbia University in 2016.
Arora worked as an editor at India.com, Brown Girl Magazine, and Floor Covering Weekly before taking a role as frontpage editor at Yahoo in 2017, then HuffPost in 2018.
New York Times
From 2018 to 2022 Arora worked at the New York Times. Arora was interviewed by Carolyn Ryan and got a contractor role reviewing headlines for the website. In 2019 Arora raised concerns about bias in pieces about chest binding that cited anti-trans site 4thWaveNow and had biased headlines.
Arora was offered a full-time role in London on the global news desk, returning to New York in 2020 and soon being named a senior staff editor. After the Times published a troubling op-ed by Tom Cotton urging a crackdown on George Floyd protestors, Dean Baquet agreed to a meeting with staffers. That led to formalizing of employee affinity groups, including Times Out, where Arora became a leader. These groups soon felt like extensions of management, though, and they were unable to implement things like bringing Trans Journalists Association in for a presentation. After some Times Out members protested an editorial board piece critical of New York Pride for requesting police not to wear uniforms, Carolyn Ryan sided with management. Tensions reached a head when anti-trans activist Pamela Paul of the New York Times book section hired anti-trans activist Jesse Singal to review anti-trans activist Helen Joyce’s book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality. Arora decided to send an email to Baquet:
I’m reaching out today as a trans non-binary NYT employee who has been deeply hurt by this week, by the actions of my own employer. I want to preface this by saying never before have I walked into a workplace on day one and felt like I belonged. For me, that’s been the magic of this place. Of this institution, of the journalism we do and the values we uphold.
Reviewing this book was absolutely the right call. Picking a cisgender, transphobic person who has a history of denying gender identity is real and who has hurt and defamed transgender journalists was not the right call. As much as transgender issues have come to the forefront in the last few years as people, we’ve always been here. I’m heartened by the progress the Times has made this past year and the renewed efforts towards DEI goals that are backed by action.
It becomes hard to be so invested in our journalism and our coverage when internally our members share the feeling that the Times is not only not as inclusive as it could be, but is actively doing harm to trans, to trans and queer folks inside the building. I don’t know how to defend this place that I love, the people and reporters and editors I love working with when my existence as a trans person feels like it’s up for debate. I’m writing to you because I respect you a lot. I want to make a difference here. I want to know that the Times hears me and sees me as a queer and trans person of color, and is taking my lived experience seriously. There’s a lot more work to be done, but healing the pain that has been caused would require starting with an acknowledgement of our wrongs with a true desire to understand where we’ve made mistakes. Thank you for taking the time to hear me out, and I look forward to hearing from you.
Baquet replied:
I do want the Times to be an inclusive place. It is important to me personally and professionally, but I have to tell you, I disagree with you in this instance. I know Pamela worked hard to find someone to review the book. There was not a long line of people who were willing to do so, to be honest. And for all the criticism of the choice in the building and on social media, I have not seen much criticism of the actual review. There is another very large principle at play here. The editor of the book review has to have tremendous freedom to make choices. Each of us has political views, personal views, and friends who write books. I think she worked tremendously hard to manage all of those issues. Harper I do hope this disagreement doesn’t make you less proud of the place, the place hasn’t changed.
Arora was assigned an audience development role in California. During an interview for a possible role under deputy managing editor Sam Dolnick, publisher A.G. Sulzberger’s cousin, Dolnick said Baquet shared Arora’s email about Singal with the entire masthead.
Arora felt that was the cue to leave, and in 2022, Arora took an editor role at Apple News.
The editorial board (May 18, 2021). A Misstep by the Organizers of Pride.New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/18/opinion/nyc-pride-police-parade.html
Karen Davis is an American musician and anti-transgender activist.
Background
Davis earned a bachelor’s degree from New York University. In college, Davis became aware of radical feminism an got involved in feminist activism.
From 1992 to 1997 Davis worked as a kindergarten teacher in Brooklyn. Davis has been a working musician and music teacher since 1997. In 2005, Davis teamed up with singer/guitarist Joe Pla to perform classic rock and blues locally.
Davis was raised Catholic and has a sibling who identifies as gay.
Anti-trans activism
Davis is reportedly “fascinated and appalled by the Gender Wars.” Davis was radicalized on reddit via suspended gender critical subreddits.
In 2020 Davis started a YouTube series called “You’re Kiddin’, Right?” The account was later suspended for hate speech.
