Kendra Blewitt is an American writer, amateur tennis player, and “autogynephilia” activist.
Background
Kendra Susan Blewitt was born in August 1945. Blewitt lives in San Francisco and lists as occupation independent writing and editing professional. Blewitt got a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from UICC in 1974.
I corresponded with Kendra in 2003. Kendra talks about time living “as Kendra” as well as her time living “as Ken.”
I am thankful to Kendra for sharing this letter about why psychologist and “autogynephilia” activist J. Michael Bailey is not offensive– Blewitt agrees with Bailey’s model that “transsexuals” may have a form of deviancy. As Kendra notes, “If you turn out deviant, say, homosexual or paraphilic, that is a fact of your existence that you must learn to live with.”
Let me state a couple of things about myself at the onset: (1) I am post-op. I was approved for SRS in April, 2002 by a well-known and very experienced gender therapist, Dr. Barbara Anderson; and I had the surgery done by Dr. Preecha last August. (2) I am autogynephilic. I never claimed to be a woman trapped in a man’s body to Dr. Anderson. I told her I wanted SRS because I had a condition of the sex drive, namely autogynephilia.
Because I was completely inexperienced at dressing and did not know anyone in the TG community when I showed up in San Francisco to start my year of RLE under Dr. Anderson, she had me go to TG support groups in order to meet the people of the group. For a year I went to two support groups every week > one in SF and one in Berkeley.
The people in the SF group were “indigent” types — mostly girls on SSI for mental problems, and prostitutes. The people at the Berkeley group mostly had jobs. In the course of attending these two support groups for a year I came to know pretty much the whole spectrum of types of the TG group — everything from the “gender-fucked” bearded man who liked to go out in public in a short skirt and nylon stockings (he was a very nice man, by the way), to very passable TS women who mostly lived in stealth, to queens who worked the street.
I am sure I don’t know the group as well as you, Andrea, since I’ve only been Kendra for a couple of years. But I do have some experience in this regard.
Since I’ve been in SF I have also acquired some experience with the gay group. I have an apartment at Geary and Leavenworth. My neighborhood used to be very gay until the AIDS epidemic hit, and there still are a lot of gay men in this neighborhood.
There used to be several gay bars and also a queen bar named the Black Rose in my neighborhood. Now there is only one gay bar — the Hob Nob Lounge. It has been in existence for 27 years, I have been told. It is right across the street from my apartment. I go there all the time — I am a regular there.
The men at the Hob Nob are mostly older men who have lived in SF for many years. As older men are prone to do, especially when they’ve been drinking, the men in this bar reminisce about their lives a lot. I have learned a good deal about gay men from the many hours I’ve spent in this bar.
Now then, I have not encountered anything in Dr. Bailey’s book that contradicts the experiences I’ve had with either the TG group or the gay group.
Regarding the autogynephilia theory, I fail to understand your hostility toward it. You obviously feel that it invalidates TS women or sullies their reputation. I do not understand why you feel this way.
I have said that I became sex changed because I was afflicted with the autogynephilia condition. Let me explain how I have justified this action.
I think there is much more to a sex drive than the erotic desires and pleasures it gives rise to. I think it is a powerful force that is active within you at all times, not just when you are aroused. It is like a river that flows in your consciousness. And at every moment, and in every activity, you are either swimming, as it were, along with the current of this river within you, or you are swimming against the current of this river. Either the current of the river is propelling you forward or you are expending energy opposing it, that is.
Now there is nothing you can do to change the kind of sex drive that you have. The sex drive assumes its form during the teen years, or earlier, and once it has assumed its form there is no changing it. If you turn out deviant, say, homosexual or paraphilic that is a fact of your existence that you must learn to live with.
Thus, if you are autogynephilic that is how the river that flows within you is. And you are confronted with an existential decision. You must either live your life swimming against the current of the river that your autogynephilia is, i.e., you must oppress it. Or else you must go with it — you must swim with the current behind you.
To conclude, I did not choose to undergo sexual reassignment surgery because I sought sexual gratification — I did this because I sought a better life.
Finally, it would seem that my choice has worked out well for me. My Mom and sister have twice come out to SF (from the Chicago area) to see me, and they are of the opinion that I am much happier as Kendra than I was as Ken.
I believe that my therapist, Dr. Anderson, considers my transition to be a success story.
It is true that I am happy as Kendra. I do not think I was unhappy as Ken, but I like my life as Kendra very much and I am sure I shall never regret my decision.
Sincerely, Kendra Susan Blewitt
P.S. I am sending a copy of this letter to Dr. Bailey.
Additional materials (8 May 2003)
Dear Andrea, I would like to add something to my Kendra-Letter. I have sent two e-mails to Dr. Bailey that I would like to add, along with some general comments. Very often I hesitate to call myself a transsexual to other transsexuals because I know they will deny that I am a transsexual. I am not one to barge into places where I feel unwelcome, and very often I do feel unwelcome in transsexual circles. Very often I am made to feel like an intruder by transsexuals when I refer to myself as a transsexual. The general public treats me with much more respect than the transsexual group does. I don’t get called a man in a dress very often when I am interacting with ordinary people. I get called a man in a dress routinely when I am interacting with transsexuals. That is what I am to many, if not to most of them — a man in a dress. Up the line we autogynephilic transsexuals are going to have to form a group of our own. The present situation is intolerable for us. We are made to feel like freaks or perverts by what should be our own people more than by anyone else. We need a group that we can belong to as equal, full-fledged members. We need to belong to a group where we can feel proud to be what we are. Belonging to a group where we are “false transsexuals” is beneath our dignity and is even unhealthy for us. We need a group of our own. I know that unity is in our general interest as transsexuals. We are being discriminated against in the workplace. This is a big problem. There are other problems that we all have in common as transsexuals. But what do we autogynephilic transsexuals have in common with anyone? What we need more than anything else right now is a sense of identity. We need that more than we need fair play in the workplace.
First Letter to Dr. Bailey:
Dear Dr. Bailey,
I think the cause of all the hostility directed toward you and your book by so many transsexuals is that they cannot bear the truth. They have not built their houses of the sense of self on the bedrock of knowledge but on the sandy soil of mere belief, and now the earth is shaking and their houses are falling down — their sense of self is breaking apart and they are experiencing the pain of deep insecurity.
I do not think Dr. Benjamin was acting completely as a scientist when he drew a sharp distinction between a cross-dresser (“transvestic fetishist”) and a transsexual. I think the man was a friend to transsexuals. I think he sympathized with them and wanted to give them some legitimacy in the medical field as well as in the general public’s opinion. And he was smart enough to realize that this could not be done if sex in the sense of erotic desires was a part of the meaning of transsexualism. So, to get what he wanted, he drew a line between those who cross-dressed for sexual reasons and those who cross-dressed for “gender” reasons.
I believe that Benjamin’s distinction between the “transvestic fetishist” and the “true transsexual” was more polemical than scientific. It was a smart thing to do to get what he wanted, i.e., to give transsexuals some social legitimacy.
This distinction was a necessary thing, given public opinion regarding sexual matters that existed at the time — i.e., thirty, forty or fifty years ago. But it was not the product of a search for truth. It was Rhetoric as opposed to Philosophy, as Plato would put it.
It was good. It worked. Transsexuals were treated less like criminals. A giant stride forward was taken in this respect. However, whenever mere rhetoric gets institutionalized and given the title of “established fact”there are certainly going to be problems up the line.
Sooner or later this theory that was “rhetoric that worked” is going to be examined by scientists, by men whose interest is the truth.
And this will cause problems. The “myth of gender” that Benjamin gave birth to and which has been institutionalized for a long time now, and given the title of “established fact,” has become deeply integrated in the sense of self that exists in many, if not almost all transsexuals. As this myth is being exposed as myth or discredited as scientific theory the poor transsexual women of the present day are getting their egos melted down, and they are experiencing the pain of deep insecurity.
I do not see that anyone is to blame for the pain that many transsexual women are presently going through. Benjamin meant well and he was very successful in a practical way. He bettered the lots of transsexuals, to be sure. But there was a price that would have to be paid in the future that came along with his good work.
There is Science and there is the Political. Rhetoric, the art of engendering belief, is what works in the Political. The scientist hates rhetoric and will destroy it. No one is to blame for the pain we observe in transsexuals today. There is Science and there is the Political. What is happening is just a natural event of the world we live in.
Sincerely, Kendra Blewitt
Second Letter to Dr. Bailey:
Dear Dr. Bailey,
I read your response to the article that appeared in the Stanford paper. I also clicked on “from the beginning” and read the whole thing you wrote.
It was very good.
Lynn Conway’s actions constitute censorship. How can someone who calls herself an intellectual, a scientist, etc., justify this?
These transsexuals are complaining that if your opinions become accepted by society they will be adversely affected personally. People won’t see them as women anymore but as men who have a sexual condition.
That is the truth of what they are, in my opinion. They are men living as women who are doing this, in the final analysis, because they have a sexual condition.
They want to believe that they were born with a female gender identity. This way there is a sense in which they are true women – and they are dependent upon this belief.
I don’t think there is any such thing as an innate sense of self.
Maybe I’m wrong. Sometimes it does seem that I was a girl all along. I think this is because I have been living as a woman for two years now, and my sense of self has been affected by this experience. But maybe I was born with a female gender identity.
I am willing to be reasonable and discuss the matter. Are they? No, there is something they are dependent upon. There is something that they need to believe. They cannot afford to be reasonable.
They will try to have it made “politically incorrect” to espouse the autogynephilia theory.
One thing they have conveniently forgotten is the effect that the institutionalization of the gender identity theory has had on autogynephilics like me. We are not true transsexuals but mere transvestic fetishists, according to this theory. Isn’t that nice? We live as women too. We don’t like being made to feel like a man in a dress any more then these “true ones” do.
The “true ones” have been doing this to us for a long time — denying that we are real transsexuals and making us feel like a man in a dress. I guess they don’t remember.
Sincerely Kendra Blewitt
Kendra’s note to me (sent 18 May 2003)
Hi Andrea,
The photo you asked for is included as an attachment.
At first I was going to send you a “nice girl” photo. It was a photo of me with my Mom. It was taken when she and my sister came from the Chicago area to visit me in San Francisco last November.
I decided instead to send you a sexy photo. This one was taken last September, a month after I’d had SRS.
Why a sexy one? Andrea, why did you call Anne Lawrence a “brick”? Would you have said such a hurtful thing if she were not promoting the autogynephilia theory? Do you think that those of us who identify as autogynephilic are doing so out of resentment because we are physically too man-like to pass and live in stealth? I chose the photo I did because I wanted to show you that I have a good body. (It is a terrible photo of my face. I was drunk at the time. Very drunk.)
Andrea, I have a body that has sex appeal to men. Andrea, I have not gotten breast implants, as you can see. Why is that? It is because I am confident of my sex appeal. I know I can turn men on even though I’m flat. Andrea, are you that confident? Do you think your body is good enough that you could afford to be flat? Well, I am that sure of myself. I haven’t bothered with breast implants for that reason.
It is the same with my voice as it is with my flat chest. If I had to I would do something about it. But I don’t have to. My sex appeal is good enough that I can get away with talking like a man.
Now then, the most passable TS woman I know is a plain jane who is fat. She is great at passing as a woman, yet her appeal to men is nil.
There is no correspondence between passability and the ability to have men want you as a lover. Passability does not imply attractiveness, and attractiveness does not imply passability.
By what authority has it been determined that the true woman of our kind is the one who can pass? Is this written in the Book of Moses, or what?
I say the criterion of who is a true woman of our type is how good you are at getting an attractive, masculine man to want you to be his lover.
I am good at that. Therefore, I am a true woman.
Sincerely, Kendra
Kathleen Anne Becker is an American veterinarian and “autogynephilia” activist.
Background
Becker was born in September 1953. Becker earned a master’s degree from the University of Louisville and worked at Louisville Gas & Electric while pursuing a veterinary degree at Auburn. Becker was deeply involved in local equestrian communities and was interested in treating horses.
On June 25, 1979, Becker was arrested and charged in the murders of parents Helen E. (Berg) Becker and Howard I. Becker Jr., as well as nine-year-old nibling Erika Elizabeth Higgins, who had also been raped. Although detectives testified that they got a confession from Becker that night, the trial ended in acquittal on all charges. Becker’s three siblings all supported their accused sibling and used the inheritance of their dead parents to mount the defense.
In 1990, Becker married horse trainer Leesa Brotzge, but they later divorced. In 2004, Becker got a legal name and gender change.
Becker worked as an on-call horse veterinarian in Indiana and Kentucky for many years before moving to Virginia and living with Faith King. Becker’s company HĂ€st manufactures large animal rescue equipment for fire departments and zoos.
Bailey’s work is gritty, controversial, and sure to create a fire storm in the transsexual community. Many will see themselves reflected in the pages, but only after a gut wrenching bout of deep and honest introspection. However, caution must be taken, as with any reference working on the forefront of developing understanding, it cannot be taken as the final word, but rather an opening salvo for further discussion, debate, and research that will either reinforce or refute the evidence. Ultimately, as difficult as it might have been to read, Bailey’s work has been a beacon of light to this conflicted soul.
I corresponded with Becker in June 2003.
You are one of four people of whom I am currently aware who are willing to be out about having a paraphilic reason for seeking transition and genital modification. As such, I would like to get more information on your experiences and philosophy regarding transition.
In a long reply, Becker mentions belonging to another “type” based on psychological profiling (Myers-Briggs “INTJ”). Some trans and gender diverse people want to be classified based on what they feel is a scientific system, as if this explains or legitimizes their feelings and actions.
Hi Andrea!
With regard to the review of Michael Bailey’s book, I must first state that it may not be possible to adequately state precisely my feelings within the limits of the written word and this E-mail. And secondly, there are areas where I disagree with Bailey and other areas where I do not feel he has gone far enough. Thus, the center of my review suggesting caution in reading the book, and perhaps not taking everything as rote.Â
I have known all my life that I have been just not “quite right”. Cross dressing, imagining myself as female and placing myself in mental roles, and the classic having difficultly trying to relate with women . . . as a man (although I have always done great as a friend, and in groups have found myself gravitating to the women where I felt more at ease.) And even having an interest in SRS and not understanding why. I had always heard that transsexuals were young, gay, and effeminate, and always knew they were female. I did not fit that standard mold.
In September of 2001, I was browsing through Anne Lawrences site when I happened upon some of the excerpts from Baileys book. To make a long story short, I read my biography from those pages. I was relieved that I finally learned that others have been down the same road. It gave me some validation and direction. And for that, I HAVE to give Bailey credit.
One of the things I have been trying very hard to do is to remember my past as it was, and not reshape it into something more pleasing as I see other persons often do. Doing that has allowed me to realize that this has always been with me, under the surface. And I also feel that being of the temperament type that I am (Myers-Briggs “INTJ”) kept me from being able to enunciate my feelings for so many years.
Here is where I deviate from Bailey. Yes, it does hurt me to think that what I have might simply be a paraphilia. However, with the same level of introspection that I have used before, I have taken a lot of time thinking on this issue. Have I had feelings in the past that were consistent with autogynephilia? The answer to that is “yes”. BUT, having been on hormones for about a year, with testosterone now quite low and manageable, many of those specific feelings have indeed waned. (And I think that Lawrence has reported that persons post SRS have reported similar changes.) I feel very strongly that autogynephilia is driven by testosterone. What has remained is still the feeling of rightness within a female body. And what I definitely have, and have always have had, are many other mental characteristics that are more predominately considered female, such as deep compassion, caring, and understanding the female point of view. So I feel that autogynephilia is just ONE of MANY components of the total transsexual experience, expressed in a variable amount in each individual, and it is driven by testosterone (thus, the reason that female-to-male transsexuals do not have a similar experience).
One of the other reviewers mentioned the “various shades of grey”. I strongly feel that before one can know “grey”, they must first know “black” and know “white”. Therefore, even though Bailey’s book does spell things out in a black and white context, I feel the shades of grey will be filled in eventually.
Andrea, I hope that this is helpful. I know your position is different, and I do respect that. But I do speak from the heart with total honesty. This whole thing has been a tough pill for me to swallow. And for this to be happening while I am making large advances in disaster preparedness on a national task force and taking a very high profile position on these matters seems to have put everything on a collision course. Yet, I know I can no longer live the life of a man, and would take a bullet before being handed that sentence. But some days I just wonder if I can make it.
Again, this E-mail can do little justice to my total thoughts, which have been intense for years. Ultimately, we are all struggling with a condition that none of us asked for. And yet, if asked if I would choose to be “normal” and take on male characteristics and thinking, I would rather be transsexual for all of the rich experience it has offered me, despite the high social price tag. I feel blessed to be allowed to know things most other persons can never know.
I would love to get to meet you someday!
With deepest respects, Kathleen
Kathleen sent the following postscript later that day:
Of COURSE E-mail is not adequate! I keep thinking of more to say!I can state that at one time, when autogynephilia seemed to be at the centerpiece for me, at least with what I saw in myself, SRS WAS a central, primary goal. Now that testosterone is gone, and autogynephilia has waned, my goal for transition is just living full time and being accepted as female. I may never afford SRS, but that is no longer a priority anyway. This would align with my thinking (and with most others) that a person is transsexual first, that happening before birth as suggested by the brain studies. But I feel that the autogynephilic tendencies are added as a result of testosterone. But for some of us, who cannot understand WHY we were the way we were, the autogynephilia is all we saw at the time.
I could discuss this all day, but I HAVE to get to work!!
Again, thank you for taking an interest in what I have to say. I do not totally support Bailey, yet I feel what he has to say is important. I’m hoping someday there may be clarification on the origins and all the variations of gender identity. But where I am today, it doesn’t really matter, as I know deep in my heart that I MUST transition to stay alive.
Kathleen
Above: Becker at work at the emergency veterinary service.
Michael McClure is an American web developer and “autogynephilia” activist.
Background
Michael John “Mike” McClure was born in 1987, grew up in California, and graduated from the University of California, Berkeley with a music degree in 2007. McClure then held a variety of software development roles and did guest and substitute teaching in the San Francisco Bay area. McClure worked at General Assembly, Apple, Fitbit, and Foxconn, as well as contract work at several firms.
McClure is part of the “rationalist” movement associated with sites like Slate Star Codex.
This book has caused quite a stir as the reviews below suggest. The subject matter is controversial, and the author’s approach–first-hand accounts and summaries of the literature–will not appeal to everyone. Despite a reliance on secondary sources, Bailey breaks new ground in this unusually lucid review of the causes of male homosexuality and transsexuality. Most arresting is his claim that there are two types of transsexuality, one related to homosexuality, the other totally different and caused by male identification with the female form. He concludes that both types of transsexuals are rooted in biology. The book should be of interest to therapists who treat transsexuals, as well as preoperative and postoperative transsexuals seeking more information. There is also a helpful “how-to” section on the transition process from male to “female,” including surgery, hormones, etc.
Note: this site erroneously attributed writing published under the pseudonym “Mark Taylor Saotome-Westlake” to McClure. Transgender Map apologizes for the error.
Duncan T. Osborne (born May 6, 1957) is an American journalist who writes extensively on LGBT issues, especially AIDS. In March 2003, he wrote a positive review of J. Michael Bailey‘s anti-transgender book The Man Who Would Be Queen for Out magazine, later cited in promotional materials from the publisher.
Background
Osborne grew up in the Boston area. His father taught physics at MIT, and his mother eventually was editor at MIT Press. He earned his Bachelor’s degree in theater from University of Colorado, then moved to New York in 1984. He began writing in 1987.
In his review, Mr. Osborne noted that Bailey “focuses exclusively on men, and he covers a broad spectrumâgay men, male-to-female transsexuals, and men who identify as neither gay nor transgender but engage in behaviors that are typically associated with those who do.”
Bailey’s publisher Joseph Henry Press used an excerpt of this review in its publicity and advertisements. Below is the Out magazine review as it appeared on the Joseph Henry Press site:
“…recommended reading for anyone interested in the study of gender identity and sexual orientation. … Bailey has produced a thoughtful book that cites recent scientific studies on homosexuality and transsexuality. It is written, however, in a style that makes it easily accessible to any reader.”
— Out Magazine, March 2003
I contacted Osborne at the time, and he sent the following reply on 20 August 2003:
I was hired by Out to write the review because I have written a number of stories, including one for Out, on gender identity disorder as well as reparative therapy. The quote you cited above is nearly the entire review. It was roughly one hundred words long and I was required to make a recommendation for or against the book with little opportunity to explore it in any depth. I chose to recommend it because I believed, and I still believe, that it is a good primer on the topics of sexuality, sexual orientation and gender identity.
My only contact with Michael Bailey, if it may be called that, was a failed effort to interview him in 1997 for a story on gender identity disorder that I wrote for a gay paper here in New York City. He never returned my phone call.
Hope this is helpful.
When I asked him if I could quote from the letter above, Osborne agreed under the following conditions:
I expect that you will use everything I wrote and it is particularly important that you note that I would still recommend the book. I would not want to read a quote that makes it seem as if I’m backing away from my original recommendation.
2008 update
In the wake of the 2008 announcement naming Ken Zucker and Ray Blanchard to the DSM-V group involved in “gender identity disorder,” Osborne wrote a piece about the early response:
Flap Flares Over Gender Diagnosis
In interviews with the gay press dating back to 1997, Zucker distanced himself from the practitioners of reparative therapy and he has won praise from some gay psychologists and psychiatrists.
He believes, but cannot prove that his therapy with young children can prevent their being transsexual as adults.
Osborne D (April 2003). Voices – Identity Crisis. Out magazine
Osborne D (May 15, 2008). Flap Flares Over Gender Diagnosis. Gay City News. http://www.gaycitynews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19693908&BRD=2729&PAG=461&dept_id=568864&rfi=6
Ethan B. Boatner, also known as E.B. Boatner, is an American author and photographer.
Background
Boatner was born 1941 and made a gender transition around age 60.
Man Who Would Be Queen review (2003)
Boatner is a longtime book reviewer for Minnesota queer publication Lavender. In the “Page Boy” column for the publication, Boatner published a positive review of The Man Who Would Be Queen when it came out in 2003, writing in part:
…a highly readable and well-researched book… Most interesting: his differentiation of the autogynephilic and homosexual transsexual; and his examination of the latest theories of the roles biology and genetics may play in gender determination. Detailed, but never dry. A fascinating book.
Page Boy column, Lavender
Boatner’s review was cited in promotional materials by publisher Joseph Henry Press.
Boatner also self-published a murder mystery and wrote a dramatic trilogy on trans topics called Changes in Time that was performed in 2013. Boatner also teaches at University of Minnesota.
Eli Coleman (born August 25, 1948) is an American sexologist who has been involved in issues related to transgender health.
Background
Coleman was born in Buffalo, New York and grew up in Montreal, Canada later moving to Chicago, Illinois.
He earned a bachelorâs degree in psychology and history at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and his masterâs in psychology at the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh. He pursued further graduate work at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and completed his Ph.D. in counseling psychology at the University of Minnesota in 1978. He became an instructor and then professor in the Universityâs Program in Human Sexuality in 1978.
He is the founding editor of International Journal of Transgenderism and International Journal of Sexual Health, and he has served in leadership roles for several professional societies, including as President of HBIGDA (now WPATH). Coleman became director of the Program in Human Sexuality in 1991.
Comments on Bailey (2003)
HBIGDA President blasts Bailey book
Urges assembled experts on transgenderism to âchallenge bad scienceâ
Release date: September 13, 2003
Ghent, Belgium — The outgoing President of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (HBIGDA) sharply criticized J. Michael Baileyâs recent book as an example of “bad science” about transgenderism.
Dr. Eli Coleman of the University of Minnesota made the remarks during his keynote speech at HBIGDAâs 18th Biennial Symposium in Ghent, Belgium today.
Addressing an audience of the worldâs foremost experts on gender identity, Coleman proposed a 10-point blueprint of current and future goals for the organization.
As he outlined the need to “promote sound and ethical research,” Dr. Coleman made a direct reference to The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University. The book has been widely denounced as scientifically unsound and deeply biased.
Dr. Coleman urged members to work with the transgender community to “end antipathy and distrust of researchers.” To illustrate what Dr. Coleman called “unfortunate setbacks” to ending this problem, he displayed the Bailey book cover. The bookâs provocative title and image of masculine legs and feet in feminine shoes are widely considered to be deliberately insulting. Referring to Baileyâs shoddy scholarship and deeply flawed research methods, Dr. Coleman emphatically declared: “We need to challenge bad science.”
HBIGDA President’s speech cites the 2003 book ‘The Man Who Would Be Queen’ among “unfortunate setbacks” for trans people.
Jamison Green, a writer and educator recently appointed to the groupâs Board of Directors, said of Coleman’s speech: “He was urging HBIGDA as an organization and the membership as a whole (as individuals) to become more assertive in addressing social and political issues that affect transpeople.”
Following the speech, HBIGDAâs incoming President Walter Meyer, M.D. vowed to pursue Dr. Colemanâs 10-point plan:
Promote sexual health including the elimination of barriers to sexual health
Learn from other cultures
Let old paradigms die and new paradigms emerge
Provide access to optimal care
Provide training to allied health professionals
Promote sound and ethical research
End stigma and discrimination
Change laws and social policies
Change religious views
Promote social tolerance for diversity
Dr. Coleman also cited important recent work done by HBIGDA, including expert testimony in a Florida custody case won by a trans father, and the need to fight renewed efforts by the religious groups which still stigmatize transpeople.
In May 2005, Dr. Coleman reiterated his opinion about the Bailey book at the IFGE conference, calling it a “setback.” For more, see Lynn Conway‘s report, linked below.
References
Conway, Lynn (April 30, 2005) Dr. Eli Coleman Rebukes J. Michael Bailey’s Book at IFGE 2005. [link]
Resources
University of Minnesota Medical School (med.umn.edu)
âThe feminine man maintains an outsider status that can be heartbreaking and confusing, or it can be liberating, depending on oneâs ever-shifting point of view. ⊠I applaud Bailey for attempting to disclose information on a subject that many people find discomfiting; that is, the place that resides between âmaleâ and âfemale.â Perhaps science can lead to understanding.â
A Different Light Books 8853 Santa Monica Blvd. West Hollywood, CA 90069 Phone: 310-854-6601 Fax: 310-659-6430 [email protected] http://www.adlbooks.com/
On 24 February 2004, the selection committee including Kurt Weber voted to retain the nomination of this book over the objections of the trans community and other concerned parties around the world.
In March 2004, the committee reconsidered and withdrew this nomination.
I will publish any comments or responses from Kurt Weber regarding this matter as I receive them.
Ina Rimpau (born 1958) is an American librarian, a staff member at the Newark Public Library system in New Jersey. Rimpau wrote a review of J. Michael Bailey‘s anti-transgender book The Man Who Would Be Queen for Library Journal, a trade publication that makes acquisition recommendations.
“[Bailey uses] chatty, lay readers’ terms and anecdotes from his own personal life and research… Recommended for comprehensive collections in sexuality, psychology, and social science.” — Library Journal, May 15, 2003
Full review (2003)
[Excerpts used by Joseph Henry Press in italics. Notable omitted part in bold.]
The Man Who Would Be Queen; The Psychology of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Bailey, J. Michael. Joseph Henry: National Academy. 2003. c.256p. index. ISBN 0-309-08418-0. $24.95.
Bailey (psychology, Northwestern Univ.) presents himself as a psychologist firmly in the center of discussions surrounding transsexualism in males. He begins by contrasting a therapist who advocates striking a four-year-old boy for “engaging in feminine behavior” [1] (putting clothes on his stuffed animals) with the “anti – Gender Identity Disorder folks” (Bailey’s term) [2] who say that society is sick for being intolerant of unmasculine boys. Using chatty, lay readers’ terms and anecdotes from his own personal life and research, Bailey dispassionately presents the two extremes but fails to ask the deeper questions, e.g., if “masculine” and “feminine” traits and identities are so natural, why must masculinity in particular be intensely policed and enforced? He takes as a given that homosexuality has a biological root and describes transsexualism as a “developmental disorder.” [3, 4] Subsequent chapters present discussions and case studies of male-to-female transsexuals, making this book an adequate starting point for discussions on gender; for more radical views, readers are encouraged to read works by Pat Califia and Kate Bornstein. Recommended for comprehensive collections in sexuality, psychology, and social science. – Ina Rimpau, Newark P.L.
Footnotes
Bailey, page 25: “At least once prior to therapy his father spanked Kraig for putting female clothes on his stuffed animals.”
Bailey, page 28: “The anti-GID folks have a logically consistent treatment recommendation: no diagnosis, no treatment.”
Bailey page 167: “This is speculative, and what causes the developmental error is anyone’s guess.”
Bailey page 207: “I suspect that both autogynephilic and homosexual gender dysphoria result from early and irreversible developmental processes in the brain. If so, learning more about the origins of transsexualism will not get us much closer to curing it.”
References
Rimpau, Ina (May 15, 2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen; The Psychology of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism [Review]. Library Journal, p. 110.
PO Box 180300 Boston MA 02118 617.421.0082 http://www.glreview.com [email protected]
On 24 February 2004, the selection committee including Martha Stone voted to retain the nomination of this book over the objections of the trans community and other concerned parties around the world.
In March 2004, the committee reconsidered and withdrew this nomination.
I will publish any comments or responses from Martha Stone regarding this matter as I receive them.
