Choomchoke Janwimaluang was a Thai plastic surgeon who served our community. He practiced on Koh Samui island at The Samui Clinic and Bandon International Hospital.
According to an online report from a former patient, Dr. Choomchoke died in September 2015.
Archival contact information:
Address: Box 109, Nathon Post Office, Koh Samui, Surat Thani, Thailand 84140
Rosemary2001 (February 6, 2016). The world has lost an artist. Realself https://www.realself.com/review/bandon-international-hospital-koh-samui-thailand-66-years-stop-mirror-gorgeous
Greechart Pornsinsirirak is a Thai plastic surgeon who has served our community. He practiced out of Yanhee Hospital in Bangkok. In 2019 Yanhee Hospital confirmed Dr. Greechart is no longer operating from their hospital.
Archival contact information:
Address: Yan Hee General Hospital, 454 Charunsanitwong Road (Soi 90) Bang-O Bangpad Bangkok, 10700 Thailand
• LINK: Sexchange at Pattaya is a new section of their commercial site. http://www.pattaya-inter-hospital.co.th/service_sexchg.html
Ellie Zara Ley (born ~1973) is a Mexican-American surgeon. She performs gender surgeries with the Gender Confirmation Center in California.
Background
Ley was born in San Luis, Sonora. She received treatment as a child in the US for a medical condition. She earned bachelor’s degrees in Spanish literature and biochemistry from University of Arizona in 1995. She earned her medical degree from the medical school of Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara in 2000, then returned to the United States to work at New York Medical College and at University of Arizona. Following her fellowship in pediatric craniofacial plastic surgery at Primary Children’s Medical Center in Utah, she trained at UCLA in hand and microsurgery. She then returned to the University of Utah for a fellowship in plastic and reconstructive surgery.
She founded the LEY Institute of Plastic & Hand Surgery before joining Toby R. Meltzer at The Meltzer Clinic in Arizona. In 2022 she joined the Gender Confirmation Center with Scott Mosser. She is licensed to practice in Arizona, California, Oregon, and Utah.
Gender identity and expression take on different meanings within different systems of thought. Because medical technologies are available to assist in the somatic expression of these identities, several medicalized disease models of the phenomena have developed. This article examines three disease models as typically applied to those who seek feminization:
The GID model is currently considered legitimate within psychological literature and is a required diagnosis to receive access to trans health services in many places. The author reviews several problems with mental illness models, including “childhood gender nonconformity” and “transvestic fetishism,” two other “mental disorders” currently considered legitimate diagnoses. The article makes several analogies, asking readers to consider whether “racial nonconformity” or “religious identity disorder” seem legitimate as well.
Pathology (“birth defect” model)
This third metaphor of impairment describes a physical disorder rather than a mental one. The “order” implied by positioning these traits and behaviors as diseases reinforces heteronormative hierarchies. These models use scientific-sounding terminology to reinforce the social belief that the “purpose” or “function” of sex and sexuality is procreation. This leads to an examination of historic problems with anatomical thresholds for determining sex. The author then draws parallels with other bioethical debates about technologies that disrupt the “natural” order of procreative sexuality. Interest in feminization is stigmatized in many cultures, and the article concludes with some suggestions for ways to consider it independently from models of sin or disease.
Author’s note: This personal viewpoint is not intended to be representative of any side or group participating in these discussions.
Download a printer-friendly version: A defining moment in our history (PDF)
Introduction Interest in feminization, historically revered or feared, has benefited from advances in science that expand possibilities for its physical expression. These advances led to scientific models of gender variance, which were positioned as objective alternatives to the judgmental “sin” models promoted by some religions. Unfortunately, some allegedly scientific models being used merely replace metaphors of sin with metaphors of disease and impairment, rather than using objective scientific language. The time has come to examine these judgmental models: the assumptions behind their definitions, how they masquerade as science, their roots in eugenics, their impact on our access to health services, and their political implications.
The most insidious disease model appears at first glance to be progressive, even liberal, but on closer examination, it views gender variant behavior in children and adults as a psychosexual pathology (a fancy way of saying it’s a sex-fueled mental illness). Though the idea has been around since the 19th century, new language for this “disorder” was proposed by Ray Blanchard (1989) and restated by Anne Lawrence (1997) and J. Michael Bailey (2003). Though the Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence (BBL) model claims to be non-judgmental in a moral sense, it is undeniably judgmental in suggesting gender variance is a disease.
These old school sexologists still use terminology based on century-old ideas about gender-variant behavior as a sex-fueled disease. Their definitions tangle up several distinct threads about sex and sexuality in our community. Inflammatory language about transwomen like “man who would be queen,” 1 “man without a penis,” 2 or “men trapped in men’s bodies” 3has led to responses in kind about BBL and their apologists, but thankfully, such polemics are now limited to shrill but secluded fringes of discussions about untangling the mess they’ve made.
Definitions and thresholds
Scientific language evolves with understanding, and scientific discussions require that words be used with scientific precision. In short, definitions matter. A definition simultaneously includes and excludes. It affects how people view our community, especially those who expose problems with existing definitions. BBL and their apologists mock the evolution of definitions and ideas as “politically correct,” 4, 5, 6, 7 a term used by guardians of convention that signals a lack of intellect and contempt for scientific progress. For instance, Lawrence’s opening salvo brags of being one of the “troublesome people who are inclined to doubt the conventional wisdom” about transgender eroticism, then just ten sentences later defends Blanchard’s use of the inaccurate and offensive term “homosexual transsexual” because it is “conventional usage in the psychiatric literature.” 8 [emphasis mine]
Specialized definitions for many words in this debate evolved within separate institutional realms. Though used differently, a term as defined in one field influences another field, especially as we see attempts to merge biology, psychology, law, and medicine into biopolitics. 9 Within the current medico-juridical system, clinical thresholds affect legal thresholds and vice versa.
Imprecise and idiosyncratic definitions plague this debate. The BBL model declares transsexual women are men with one of two sexual desires: “homosexual” (males aroused by males) and “autogynephilic” (males aroused by the thought or image of themselves as women). Both categories efface our identities as women, but “autogynephilia” is more problematic in many ways. One major problem is the tendency for some who embrace the term to look at the etymology and think it denotes an innocent and happy form of feminist self-esteem: “I love myself as a woman!” they’ll say. I do too, but that’s not what this word denotes. When I say, “‘Autogynephilia’ is defined by its creator as a type of paraphilia,” some say, “Well, that’s not how I use it.” That’s like saying someone is a pedophile because she loves children, or that someone is a zoophile because he loves his pets. Those terms are clinical and legal descriptors. Yes, “pedophile” literally means “love of children” in Greek, and “autogynephile” means “love of self as woman,” but both terms are inexorably linked to their clinical origins as psychosexual pathologies.
Calling oneself or others “autogynephilic” is participating in one’s own pathologization, and it legitimizes this fake disease when people claim they don’t have it. BBL are engaging in scientific McCarthyism, where they claim a hallmark of “autogynephilia” is that those afflicted will deny it. Any refutation becomes proof they are right, a no-win situation like asking “when did you stop beating your wife?”
When we say “autogynephilia” is a made-up disease, some mistakenly think we are claiming erotic interest in feminization is made-up, too. Obviously, this exists. Many women in our community have been very open and honest about their erotic interest, 10 yet still take issue with labeling it a disease. 11
Sex and sexuality
My response to “sexology” is similar to how a person of color might respond to “raceology.” I question anyone who seeks to draw bright lines between nuanced possibilities of sex and sexuality, especially when they claim their attempt is science instead of something arbitrary and subjective. Trying to map a scientific schema onto complex traits and behaviors is like turning an impressionist painting into a paint-by-numbers. Those who fear miscegenation of the sexes or sexualities are just like those racists who use “science” to reinforce socially constructed categories of ethnicity. As Anne Fausto-Sterling notes, “Labeling someone a man or a woman is a social decision. We may use scientific knowledge to help us make the decision, but only our beliefs about gender—not science—can define our sex. Furthermore, our beliefs about gender affect what kinds of knowledge scientists produce about sex in the first place.” 12
What kinds of knowledge about sex are BBL producing? They claim variously that homosexuality appears to be an evolutionary mistake 13 and a “developmental error” 14, and gender variance is a “defect in a man’s sexual learning,” 15 and a “sexual problem.” 16 It makes sense that a doctor would choose a disease metaphor and psychologists would use a mental disorder model to describe their observations and impressions. If we have a disorder, then what is the “order” to which they adhere? They imply the “purpose” and “function” of sex and sex organs is procreation. Why, it’s so obviously true that the belief shouldn’t even be examined, right? According to people who believe this overly simplified idea, males have evolved (or were designed) to be attracted to females, and vice versa. In their worldviews, anything that deviates from that is, well, deviant.
Well, to borrow a phrase, a few troublesome people are inclined to doubt this conventional wisdom. 17 Many of us question Lawrence’s claim that sexual desire is “that which moves us most.” 18 We point to our experiences and feel our identities are what drive us; Wyndzen shows psychology supports our recognition of how powerful a force “identity” can be. 19 We even question some passages of Darwin and the Bible (at the same time, no less!). BBL get very upset when highly respected evolutionary biologists like Roughgarden 20 or Gould 21 question their most deeply-held beliefs about sexual selection and human behavior.
Eugenics, genetics, degenerates, gender
The words “eugenics,” “genetics,” “degenerates,” and “gender” all derive from the same Greek root meaning “to produce or bring forth life.” Some sciences and some religions seek to explain our genesis and control our reproduction of subsequent generations. New reproductive technologies are ushering in a host of bioethical issues and raising the specter of a new wave of eugenics, where the genocide (another related word) will happen before or shortly after conception, after genetic material is screened for “undesirable” traits. Should people with Down Syndrome or dwarfism be eliminated from the gene pool? How about intersexed people? If Bailey’s colleagues find the “gay gene,” 22 should we wipe out sexual minorities, too? What about gender minorities? Will we see a “transgenocide”? Who decides what’s a disease or a degeneracy?
As evidenced by BBL’s metaphors of disorder and disease, people can only express ideas in the language they have available. Their models of sex and sexuality originated with doctors and criminologists in the late 19th century eugenics movement, and BBL’s ideas haven’t evolved much from the influential works that shape their thinking. After Darwin’s Origin of the Species (1859) came Francis Galton’s Hereditary Genius (1869). Following ideas in that book, Galton coined the term “eugenics” in 1883, which melded with the emerging fields of criminology and sexology. Though the term “eugenics” is now rightfully associated with Nazism, a few modern adherents hope to usher in an “Age of Galton.” Bailey and Blanchard are charter members of a conservative-run eugenics discussion group devoted to this pursuit. 23
Three physicians who were Galton contemporaries are central to the BBL worldview: Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing, who wrote Psychopathia Sexualis (1886); Havelock Ellis, who wrote The Criminal (1889) and Sexual Inversion (1897); and Magnus Hirschfeld (coiner of both “transvestite” and “transsexual”), who in 1897 founded Germany’s Scientific Humanitarian Committee, whose motto was “justice through science.” Like BBL, these doctors genuinely believed that social ostracism of sexual minorities would be eliminated through science, but we all know what happened next in Germany. These doctors’ “scientific” models were imbued with eugenic paternalism (they believed homosexuals had a pathology and were unfit for procreation), and they claimed those who engaged in non-procreative sex were biologically different. By mid-century, Hirschfeld’s institute had been destroyed, and persecuted minorities had been rounded up and murdered based on “scientific” models that claimed groups like Jews, gays, and other persecuted minorities were “degenerate,” biologically distinct, and a threat to “social hygiene.”
Lest we think this is an isolated phenomenon that only happened in Nazi Germany, in America, disability and race took center stage in the eugenics movement, 24 which focused on sterilization and birth control for the “unfit.” 25 In Canada during the same period, the focus was immigrants, and the method of control was psychiatry. A physician named Charles Kirk Clarke oversaw the two largest Canadian asylums before accepting Canada’s top mental-health post. Clarke advocated eugenic policies to limit the immigration and marriage of the “defective.” He also used psychiatric diagnoses to incarcerate new citizens. Foreign-born patients were 50% of his institutionalized population, including political activists, homosexuals, and other “defectives.” 26
Clarke’s sociobiological leanings are still alive and well at the institution named after him, The Clarke Institute in Toronto, where Ray Blanchard works. 27 There, Kurt Freund and Blanchard used Freund’s controversial plethysmograph to delineate deviance. 28 Though the quack device is just a lie detector for the penis (open to manipulation and interpretation by both subject and observer), they used it extensively to separate homosexual from “non-homosexual,” and later to do sex experiments on “male gender dysphorics, paedophiles , and fetishists,” which they lumped together, yet divided into homosexual and “non-homosexual.” 29
In historic diagnoses for sex problems, homosexuality and masturbation were “diseases” that could strike either sex, but other problems were gendered degeneracy: women who had “too much” interest in straight sex had the now-discredited disease “nymphomania,” while men who had “too little” interest in it were inverts or perverts, a still legitimate disease category called “paraphilia.”
Dysphoria, disease, disorder, disability, defect
According to my medical records, I am mentally ill. The psychiatry industry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) alleges that I am afflicted with “gender identity disorder” (GID). Before that, I had “childhood gender nonconformity,” from their special “kids’ menu” of mental disorders. Others with an interest in feminization get diagnosed with the “disorder” of “transvestic fetishism.” 30 For many years, some in our community have relied on mental illness models as a form of validation. I ascribe to the view that “psychiatric diagnoses are stigmatizing labels, phrased to resemble medical diagnoses and applied to persons whose behavior annoys or offends others. ‘Mental illness’ is not something a person has, but is something [a person] does or is.” 31
I suppose I had a “dis-ease,” an uneasiness, a dysphoria about the sorts of social and sexual expression I was allowed in the gender roles assigned to me at birth. I did not conform until it became clear in 7th grade that the other option was ever-increasing ostracism and violence, but since when is non-conformity a disease? Imagine a mental illness diagnosis for “racial nonconformity” or “religious identity disorder.”
Disease models affect the kinds of knowledge produced by those who use them. Bem called sex researchers’ preoccupation with the causes of homosexuality “scientifically misconceived and politically suspect” because embedded in their preoccupation with causality is the idea that something went wrong that needs to be diagnosed and fixed. 32 The situation is no different when we look at how sex researchers study transgender persons. BBL are what Ordover calls “biological apologists” who look to the body for absolute truths. A major medicalization of homosexuality occurred in the 1990s, in response to AIDS (a disease which led to renewed interest in a “gay gene” and later a “gay germ” disease model of homosexuality). 33 While Bailey was drawing federal funds to isolate homosexuality the way others looked for HIV, nobody was looking for the “straight gene” or “straight germ.” Like a good eugenicist who believes biology is destiny and genetics dictate human behavior, Bailey started linking gender roles to genetic discussions: “childhood gender nonconformity does not appear to be an indicator of genetic loading for homosexuality.” 34 Is gender genetic?
Despite these problems, many in our community embrace a disease metaphor. Lawrence intones about “symptoms” of transsexualism, its “clinical course,” the benefits of “palliative treatment.” 35 Lawrence then magnanimously claims that “everyone has a right to self-define,” yet asserts that those who disagree with Lawrence’s diagnosis aren’t being very honest with themselves or others. A “palliative treatment” helps symptoms while leaving the disease uncured, and the uncured disease can be a personal and political identity. In her important series of scientific criticisms of Blanchard, Wyndzen cites studies on self-verification where people “assimilated their illnesses into their identities.” 36 Almost everyone who is attracted to the concept of “autogynephilia” identifies through metaphors of impairment. Many participants in the main “‘autogynephilia’ support” newsgroup are on public assistance, which seems related to their fears about removal of gender variance from the DSM. They fear subsidized medical services will be denied if there is no mental illness classification. But what do they think will happen if there is differential diagnosis that claims their subgroup does all this to indulge an autoerotic interest? Should insurance companies give out high heels as “palliative treatment” for shoe fetishists?
As Lawrence notes, “There are many human behaviors that look like the same thing, but really aren’t.” 37 Previous medical attempts to catalogue behavior like Lawrence’s were not only pathologizing, but insulting: People like Lawrence were “transvestitic applicants for sex reassignment” 38 who are “aging” 39 and “distressed,” 40 suffering from “pseudotranssexualism” 41 a “non-transsexual” variant of “gender identity disorder” (GIDAANT), 42 and “iatrogenic artifact.” 43 Many notable “borderline” cases are doctors: Renee Richards, Anne Lawrence, Gregory/Gloria Hemingway. They may epitomize these published observations. They all self-treated, vacillated, and “detransitioned” to varying degrees, and all three challenge existing diagnostic categories. 44 If interest in feminization is an iatrogenic artifact (a disease made up by doctors), wouldn’t doctors be the best evidence of that? Further, why would Dr. Marci Bowers transition without incident in the same hospital group that forced Anne Lawrence to resign? Do they really have the same “disease”? I have never heard Dr. Bowers have to assert she’s a “real” transsexual, as Dr. Lawrence has.
I do not defer to people just because they are clinicians. My work fighting quacks and consumer fraud has put me in touch with countless “experts” who have no business in science or medicine. Some “expert” will probably diagnose my questioning “experts” as “authority nonconformity” or some other made-up disease to undermine my credibility. After all, my questioning the legitimacy of “autogynephilia” is evidence I’m afflicted with it. To refute that kind of argument, we need to contextualize the term. “Paraphilia” and “autogynephilia”
The term “paraphilia” first appeared in 1923, in a book prepared for doctors and criminologists by physician Wilhelm Stekel. 45 Over eighty years later, BBL collaborator Simon LeVay still calls paraphilias “illnesses that need treatment.” 46 “Paraphilia” is the psychiatric term for problematic sexual desire or behavior. The current name for this alleged mental disorder first appeared in the DSM in 1980. 47 It describes “paraphilia” as “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving (1) nonhuman objects (2) the suffering or humiliation of oneself or one’s partner, or (3) children or other non-consenting persons…. The behavior, sexual urges or fantasies cause clinically significant distress in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning” 48
Some people who identify with the diagnosis of “autogynephilia” chime in at this point and say, “Well, then I don’t have a paraphilia, because I don’t think I have a problem.” The most recent version of DSM was revised just for them—it says this illness can be diagnosed even if the person does not experience any subjective distress or impaired functioning. 49 LeVay notes: “This is quite a significant shift; it emphasizes that psychiatrists may go beyond responding to clients’ complaints and may use their expertise for other purposes, such as protecting society from sex crimes.” 50
“Autogynephilia” is not a behavioral model, it describes a sex-fueled mental illness that lumps gender variance in with sex crimes. BBL believe that paraphilias cluster, meaning that they believe that “autogynephiles” are more likely to be aroused by children, corpses, excrement and other illegal and socially unacceptable things. This diagnosis was widely ignored after Blanchard first suggested it in the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease in 1989. 51 By the end of his series of papers, Blanchard was shoehorning other behaviors into his model with crackpot variants like “partial autogynephilia.” 52 However, Blanchard and his colleagues had enough influence in this rarely-studied subspecialty to get “autogynephilia” mentioned in the DSM. 53 The work would have remained an obscure intradisciplinary skirmish until Lawrence found Blanchard’s articles in 1997, during a time of great need. A year earlier, Lawrence’s erotic interest in ritualized genital modification led to indulging that interest. 54 Lawrence had taken “physician, heal thyself” to heart previously, and after yet another failed “cure” in the form of vaginoplasty, Lawrence’s fascination did not wane. In 1997, a lack of social acceptance at work (described in one account as “bizarre behavior”) 55 and an incident where Lawrence examined an unconscious patient for signs of ritualized genital modification ended a respected career. 56 Discovering Blanchard was clearly revelatory for Lawrence, who now had a diagnosis to explain what happened. Suddenly, this forgotten diagnosis had a vocal and influential champion. I dismantle the pseudoscience behind “autogynephilia” in a longer essay elsewhere. 57
A scientific or reasonable discussion of “autogynephilia” is like a scientific discussion of horoscopes: there’s no science to discuss, only pseudoscience. Yes, both concepts exist, but that does not mean either are legitimate science. Some people have a need to create an identity based on a worldview where people are predictable based on vague, unproven categories that arbitrarily assign traits to everyone, imposing order onto an unpredictable and incomprehensibly complex world.
“Transsexual” defined
BBL have proposed several definitions for “transsexual” that include people not previously considered within that definition. Their definitions view gender variance through the lens of disordered sexual desire. Bailey defines “transsexual” as anyone who has “the desire to become a member of the opposite sex.” 58 They do not have to act on this desire—“only serious thoughts” are enough to qualify. 59 This model reflects Bailey’s definitions of sexual orientation: someone is a homosexual whether they act on their desire or not. Lawrence believes transsexuality is “fundamentally about changing one’s anatomy, or sex; and that sometimes it may have little to do with gender identity, or with gender role.” 60 Some do this “not primarily because they have a gender problem, but because they have a sex problem, and indeed a sexual problem… the expression of a paraphilia” 61Blanchard says he’s reluctant to label children as “transsexual,” 62 which is reminiscent of the “pre-homosexual” language used by his homophobic counterparts in “gay cure” groups like NARTH. 63 Blanchard’s colleague Ken Zucker is a vocal advocate of reparative therapy for gender-variant children, and he considers transsexuality “a bad outcome.”64 In fact, Bailey has noted that unchecked, this disease could spread: a world tolerant of gender-variant children “might well come with the cost of more transsexual adults.” 65
Echoing Lawrence’s strict anatomical construction of “transsexual,” a quaint aphorism claims, “If you aren’t a transsexual before surgery, you are after.” Really? What about David Reimer or others surgically altered as children who do not identify as transsexual? 66 Conflicting definitions occur within any demographic grouping. Extremist separatists from both sides of any constructed binary often create unlikely alliances: for instance, “people of color” and “African-American” are terms debated by both ethnic separatists and conservatives. 67 In our community, pluralist concepts like “queer” or “transgender” are debated in circles where distinctions between gay men and transwomen, or between crossdressing and transsexualism, are very important.
Lawrence insists the few who embrace this diagnosis “do not declare ourselves sick.” 68 Not morally sick, anyway, but physically sick. Lawrence’s self-descriptions have remarkable parallels with descriptions of binge-and-purge cycles among crossdressers who hate their behavior, or those “afflicted” with “unwanted homosexuality”: “The loneliness and disconnection from others that typically accompany autogynephilia [sic] are a large part of what makes this condition feel like genuine paraphilia (i.e., a “disorder”) to many of us who experience it (and I’m including myself here) and not merely a “benign variant” form of human sexuality.” 69 Swap “autogynephilia” with the word “homosexuality,” and Lawrence’s comment would feel right at home in a NARTH publication. Lawrence’s “problem” is not self-love, but self-hate.
For those of us who view “gender” and “sex” as socially constructed, transsexualism can’t be separated from its social component. Phenotype can trump genotype; gender expression can trump anatomy. Those who need to use anatomy as evidence of their identity have failed in gaining acceptance within a social or institutional framework. Everyone has a right to self-identify, but if others don’t accept that proclaimed identity, we must either accept their lack of acceptance, or work to change their minds. People can legislate rights, but not acceptance. That has to be earned.
Audre Lorde said “Your silence will not protect you.” 70 I say your anatomy will not protect you, either. Legal and medical models based on anatomical benchmarks for “male” and “female” will inevitably conflict and fail. Sexists who wish to efface the identities of women like me can always find a physiological or behavioral reason to say I am “‘really’ a man,” and some of the worst offenders are “helping professionals” and people in our community. They echo the racists who came up with “scientific” schemes to determine who was “‘really’ black,” or heterosexists like BBL who create ways to determine who is “‘really’ gay.”
Gatekeeping versus services on demand
Much of my early activism was informed by sex-positive, pro-choice feminism. We passed out condoms and “Just Say Yes” sex-ed books at Chicago Public Schools, and we defended clinics from Operation Rescue. One of our major initiatives was family planning services (including abortion) that were “safe, free and on demand.” I have always seen parallels between family planning and transition-related medical services, both of which were once only available through back alley clinics and black market sources. Women in our community died from this, and still die from illegal and unregulated products and procedures because of our legal status. I believe controlling our bodies is a fundamental human right. If someone wishes to undergo a vasectomy, vaginal rejuvenation, abortion, facial tattoo, piercings, tongue splittings, facial feminization, breast implants, mastectomy etc., I believe these procedures should be available to anyone who is willing to sign a release. I find it quite telling that our surgical procedures and abortion both face similar challenges, since both involve altering one’s capacity to reproduce.
Psychiatric gatekeeping only works for those who are unwilling or unable to find easier and faster ways. Before the internet, most young people got what they needed through extralegal networks (many poor people still do), and anyone who had the means would skip gatekeeping altogether and jet off to an exotic locale, as it had been done for many years before the gender clinics began imposing controls. At the apex of the gender clinic system, only those willing to endure a process akin to criminals at a parole hearing took that route—people who would say whatever the gatekeeper wanted to hear in order to get what they desired. 71 Ironically, many who tried to get around gatekeeping during their own involvement now insist it remain in place. 72 Lawrence, who is fond of quoting Audre Lorde, 73 must have missed “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” 74 Gatekeeping also appeals to those who don’t get much validation except from gatekeepers. The acceptance letter becomes about the only acceptance they get. Not only is getting a vagina a status symbol and evidence of identity for this tiny group, but “beating the system” is a status symbol, too (which might also explain the correlation between online “‘autogynephilia’ support” and welfare support).
I should note that I had a great therapist who helped me immensely. I probably would have gone even without being required. Therapy and support should be encouraged, but voluntary, and without the stigma of disease, in the way that someone questioning their spiritual beliefs might find therapy helpful without needing their spiritual journey labeled as a “religious identity disorder.” With gatekeeping, we end up with people like BBL controlling access to services in exchange for money or sex. “Sexology” is an unregulated activity in most states, meaning anyone could set up shop as a sexologist or sex therapist. Bailey, Lawrence, and others have all used their “sexologist” credentials to gain easier access to sex partners. Some dismiss this as OK because they sign our little permission slips so we can get medical services. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t feel it’s ethical or scientific for gatekeepers and sex researchers to have sex with clients and research subjects. I also don’t want my tax dollars federally subsidizing the sex life of a self-hating [trans]-chaser like Bailey, so he can meet women like me and later claim we “have the brains of men but the genitals of women” 75 or are prone to criminal activity and sexual promiscuity.
Here’s my question: why not cut out these middlemen and simply request and receive services? If people go to their physician and say they are depressed or anxious, the doctor believes their self-report and suggests options. Why can’t it be that simple for us?
Replacing GID as the principal diagnostic means for obtaining medical service is considered a top health priority in our community. Citing a progressive San Francisco program, the National Coalition for LGBT Health states: “There is a great need for more such programs that avoid GID as a requirement for access… this [requirement] results in many transgender people avoiding the psychiatric diagnosis process altogether, and not accessing medically regulated Trans Health Services.” 76 The interest itself isn’t the problem, it’s the anxiety and depression caused by depriving its expression. 77 If in some cases hormones and surgery help relieve anxiety and depression, they should be available as an effective, time-tested option.
Roughgarden notes: “Their bogus categories and made-up diseases are intended to subordinate, not to describe.” 78 Until we get away from this childlike dependence and deference to so-called “experts” simply because they take our money or don’t kick us out of their offices, our accommodation in healthcare and law will not be fully realized.
Beyond BBL
People like BBL rarely admit they are wrong, because they are very concerned about their academic legacy (which mirrors their beliefs about offspring). They will spend the rest of their lives fighting tooth and nail to defend their words and actions, but in the end BBL will be regarded as an interesting curiosity from the waning years when our community was considered disordered and diseased because of our interest in feminization, in whatever form that interest might take. Luckily, we don’t have to convince them they are wrong; we just have to convince everyone else.
We need to embrace judgment-free models to describe these phenomena. I hereby suggest the phrase that leads off this article: interest in feminization (IF) and the subset erotic interest in feminization (EIF) as umbrella terms without the stigma of disease. It encompasses not only our community, but anyone regardless of motivation, affectional orientation, or gender assigned at birth. Change “F” to “M” in the acronym for the F to M folks. I can think of a laundry list of problems with this proposed terminology, but this article is part of an ongoing evolution of ideas. I’ll leave the definitive statements to those who fancy themselves “experts” who claim they know “the truth.” My thoughts here won’t be the end of old ways of thinking, but with luck, it will spark some new ones, where we describe ourselves and our identities without the stigma of sin and disease.
From the day in April 2003 when Professor Lynn Conway began an investigation into Bailey’s book, 79 it was clear that this was a defining moment for our community. We mobilized all around the world as never before. 80 We made sure this book did not become another Transsexual Empire. 81 BBL underestimated everything about us, from our numbers, 82 to our intelligence, 83 to our ever-strengthening network, to the direct contact we have with our youngest and most vulnerable, to our influential positions in every career and profession, to our ability to effect positive change. 84 This isn’t just evolution, it’s revolution. We’re replacing sin and disease with pride and strength, and this is only the beginning.
Los Angeles September 2004
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Drs. Madeline Wyndzen and Nancy Ordover for key insights and research that informed this article.
References and notes
Please note: Anne Lawrence is notorious for removing website materials as soon as comments in them become difficult to defend. While every effort has been made to keep up-to-date links, some materials may no longer be available online.
4. Lawrence AA (2000). Sexuality and transsexuality: A new introduction to autogynephilia [sic] http://www.annelawrence.com/autogynephilia.html
5. Pinnel R (2003). Gay, straight, or lying? Science has the answer. Joseph Henry Press sales materials for The Man Who Would Be Queen. http://www.jhpress.org/press_release/10530.pdf [archive]
6. Petersen M (2003). Resignation letter to HBIGDA, 4 November 2003. http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/maxine-petersen.html
16 Lawrence AA (1999). Lessons from autogynephiles [sic]: eroticism, motivation, and the Standards of Care. http://www.annelawrence.com/1999hbigda1.html
23 Bierich H, Moser B (2003). Queer science: An ‘elite’ cadre of scientists and journalists tries to turn back the clock on sex, gender and race. SPLC Intelligence Report, Winter 2003. http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=96 Sailer founded the group on 3 March 1999; Bailey and Blanchard both joined on 4 March. Like early eugenicists, this group advocates what they believe is a “benign” form of eugenics called positive eugenics, where “good” traits are encouraged, but this inevitably leads to negative eugenics, where “bad” traits are eliminated. For a Who’s Who of the modern eugenics movement, see the full list at: http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/human-biodiversity.html
25 Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S., 200, 207 [1927]: Associate Justice Holmes: “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” http://www.dnalc.org/resources/buckvbell.html (click “Court’s decision” and see page 3 for full text)
45 Stekel W (1923). Der Fetischismus dargestellt für Ärzte und Kriminalogen. Störungen des Trieb- und Affektlebens (die parapathischen Erkrankungen) 7. [Volume 7: The fetishes, prepared for doctors and criminologists. Disorders of the Instincts and the Emotions (the parapathic illnesses)] Berlin/Wien: Urban & Schwarzenberg, 1923. First English translation by S. Parker as Sexual Aberrations. 1930 Liveright Publishing, New York. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0871400499/qid=1094416834/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-8778638-7938457?v=glance&s=books
62 Federoff JP, Blanchard R (2000). The case for and against publicly funded transsexual surgery. Psychiatry Rounds, April 2000. http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/psychiatry_rounds.pdf
63 Byrd AD (2004). Book review: The Man Who Would Be Queen. via NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) e.g. “Bailey’s focus on femininity among pre-homosexual boys and homosexual men…” http://www.narth.com/docs/queen.html
64 Bailey JM (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen, p. 31. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309084180/html/31.html
65 Ibid. p. 33. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309084180/html/33.html
66 Colapinto J (2001). As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl. Perennial. As I discuss in my essay “Wannabes?”, transsexual women seek medical options to confirm their identities as women; others seek them to confirm their identities as transsexuals. Differential diagnosis appeals to some people who wish to be distinguished from or included with a group of people. Some people who seek bodily feminization base their evidence of inclusion on these procedures and use the disparaging term “just a crossdresser,” as if that is a less legitimate interest or identity. http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/wannabes.html
67 Swarns RL (2004). “African-American” becomes a term for debate. New York Times, 29 August 2004. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60614FA345A0C7A8EDDA10894DC404482
68 Lawrence AA (2000). Sexuality and transsexuality: A new introduction to autogynephilia [sic]. http://www.annelawrence.com/autogynephilia.html
69 Lawrence AA (2004). Posted as “autogynephile1,” 25 August 2004. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/autogynephiliasupport/message/3682
70 Lorde A (1984). The transformation of silence into language and action. Sister Outsider. The Crossing Press. p. 41. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895941414/qid=1094418917/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/002-8778638-7938457?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
71 Bornstein K (1995). Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women, and the Rest of Us. New York: Vintage Books. e.g.: “Transsexuality is the only condition in Western culture for which the therapy is to lie.” http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679757015/qid=1094418971/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/002-8778638-7938457
72 Lawrence AA (1998). Absence of regrets after a “short real-life test.” http://www.annelawrence.com/shortrlt.html
73 Lawrence AA (1999). Autogynephilia [sic]: Frequently-asked questions. http://www.annelawrence.com/agfaqs.html
74 Lorde A (1984). The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. Sister Outsider. The Crossing Press. p. 110. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895941414/qid=1094418917/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/002-8778638-7938457?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
75 Tremmel PV (2003). Study suggests difference between female and male sexuality. Northwestern University press release, 12 June 2003. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/nu-ssd061203.php
76 National Coalition for LGBT Health (2004). An overview of U.S. Trans Health Priorities. August 2004 update. http://www.lgbthealth.net/TransHealthPriorities.pdf (requires reader)
77 Vitale A (1997). Gender dysphoria: Treatment limits and options. http://www.avitale.com/treatmentoptions.htm
78 Roughgarden J (2004). The Bailey affair: Psychology perverted. http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Reviews/Psychology%20Perverted%20-%20by%20Joan%20Roughgarden.htm
79 Conway L (2003-2004). An investigation into the publication of J. Michael Bailey’s book on transsexualism by the National Academies. http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html
80 Burns C and 1,460 signatories (2004). J. Michael Bailey book petition. http://www.petitiononline.com/bailey/petition.html
81 Allison R (1998). Janice Raymond and autogynephilia [sic]. http://www.drbecky.com/raymond.html Reviewing Raymond JG. The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male. Beacon Press, 1979. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0807021644/qid=1094430439/sr=8-4/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i4_xgl14/002-8778638-7938457?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
82 Conway L (2002). How frequently does transsexualism occur? http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TSprevalence.html
83. Bailey JM (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen, p. 179. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309084180/html/179.html
84 Letellier P (2004). Group rescinds honor for disputed book. PlanetOut.com Network, 16 March 2004. http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2004/03/16/3
Please send all correspondence and reprint requests via feedback.
This independent research was funded by reader donations. If you found this useful or interesting and would like to see more articles of this sort in the future, please consider supporting transgender scholarship.
Peggy Cohen-Kettenis is a Dutch psychologist who helped found an important early clinic that served trans and gender diverse youth and adolescents.
Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis was born in 1948 in Jakarta, Indonesia. Indonesia declared independence from the Dutch on August 17, 1945, and the family left in 1951 when it became dangerous for Dutch colonialists to stay, since Cohen-Kettenis’ seminal parent was a police commissioner. After arriving at The Hague, they moved to Rotterdam, then Utrecht.
Cohen-Kettenis attended Stedelijk Gymnasium Utrecht and Johan de Witt Gymnasium Dordrecht and earned a doctorate from Utrecht University in 1973.
Professor of Medical Psychology VUmcVUmc Sep 2002 – Jul 2013
Professor UMC Utrecht Sep 1987 – Sep 2002
Nederlands Instituut van Psychologen (NIP) logo Voorzitter Sector G 1997 – 2000
Cohen-Kettenis served as Professor of gender development and psychopathology at the Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht.
Transgender research
In 1987, Cohen-Kettenis started the first outpatient clinic in Europe for children and adolescents with gender problems and intersex conditions.
Cohen-Kettenis was a member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s Standards of Care Committee and of the Task Force of the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline on the endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons.
Psychologist Peggy Cohen-Kettenis reacts less negative. She is, after reading parts of the book not surprised about the row, but “when Bailey says that sexual preference and gender identity are not two entirely independent dimensions, he is not necessarily wrong”, she says.
In contrast to Bailey, Cohen-Kettenis expresses herself very diplomatic. As no other she knows the sensitivity of this terrain and the ease with which a “conflict can be created around this issue”. The psychologist agrees that not all transsexuals are heavily gender-dysphoric in youth. She attributes the dominance of “the woman captured in a man’s body” image, to it’s endless repetition by the media.
[…] Gooren is scathing about Blanchard’s work. […] Cohen-Kettenis shares Gooren’s objections to terms like homosexual and non-homosexual transsexuals. She would rather differentiate between early and late onset transsexuals. But apart from the terminology, these groups are very similar to those of Bailey and Blanchard. Primary TSs are more often homosexual while secondary TSs usually have had straight relationships before entering treatment, Cohen-Kettenis explains. “In the second group, during puberty cross-dressing is often paired with sexual excitement ” she says. “When they enter treatment however, the cross dressing is very restful”.
Cohen-Kettenis estimates half the number of TSs are secondary TSs. Whether all secondary TSs have had a autogynephile history she cannot say. “Extreme gender dysphoria can, I think, come to be in all sorts of ways. Secondary TSs are a very diverse group. We also see people who still are autogynephile.”
Cohen-Kettenis thinks that patient care will not be influenced by this theory. TSs do not have to fear that Cohen would see autogynophilia as a disqualification for treatment. The decisive factor is the suffering of the client, and whether treatment can indeed help to relieve the pain. In this, Blanchard and Bailey agree and mention that autogynophiliacs do not have a higher rate of post-treatment regrets.
Vermij, Peter (September 27, 2003). Een man gevangen in een mannenlichaam.NRC https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2003/09/27/een-man-gevangen-in-een-mannenlichaam-7655797-a1162822 Translation: Arianne van der Ven.
Selected publications by Cohen-Kettenis
Dan J. Stein, Peter Szatmari, Wolfgang Gaebel, Michael Berk, Eduard Vieta, Mario Maj, Ymkje Anna de Vries, Annelieke M. Roest, Peter de Jonge, Andreas Maercker, Chris R. Brewin, Kathleen M. Pike, Carlos M. Grilo, Naomi A. Fineberg, Peer Briken, Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis & Geoffrey M. Reed (2020). Mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders in the ICD-11: an international perspective on key changes and controversies. BMC Med18, 21 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-1495-2
The community of sex and gender minorities covers the full political spectrum. The size and inclusiveness of the community is debated, but this project takes a very broad definition of who is included.
This project also covers some topics that overlap with sexual minorities as well, including:
Gay
Lesbian
Bisexual
Asexual
Polyamorous
Pansexual
Kink and unusual erotic interests
While all of these communities and identities have overlapping interests and political goals, it’s difficult to generalize. The majority of the community seeks legal protections from harm and discrimination:
This site also covers people who are connected to our community, including those who do not consider themselves part of it.
It includes people who support the community, as well as people who hold a wide range of views that many in the community consider oppositional to one or more aspects of our community’s political goals.
Use the search feature to look for a specific person. If you don’t find a profile, please send a suggestion!
Dana Beyer is an American physician, political candidate, and transgender rights activist. Beyer was involved in protests of the transphobic 2003 book The Man Who Would Be Queen.
Background
Dana Beyer was born February 9, 1952 and grew up in New York City. Beyer earned a bachelor’s degree from Cornell University in 1974 and a medical degree from University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in 1978. Beyer worked as an eye surgeon before going into activism and politics.
Philanthropic work includes Gender Rights Maryland and Equality Maryland.
Milton Thomas “Milt” Edgerton, Jr. was an American plastic surgeon who served our community. Edgerton is widely considered one of the most important American plastic surgeons of the 20th century.
Background
Edgerton was born in Atlanta on July 14, 1921 and earned a bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Emory University in 1941. Edgerton earned a medical degree from Johns Hopkins University in 1944. Following a surgical residency, Edgerton joined the United States Army and operated on injured World War II veterans.
Edgerton joined the Johns Hopkins faculty in 1951 and got tenure in 1962. In 1970 Edgerton was recruited to the University of Virginia to found the Department of Plastic Surgery, working and teaching there until retiring in 1994.
Edgerton had many students and colleagues who served our community as well, including Howard W. Jones, Jr. and John Gale Kenney. Edgerton was author of four books and over 500 scientific papers on plastic surgery. As shown in the selected bibliography below, Edgerton’s articles when read from earliest to latest read like an unfolding of the history of our community.
Edgerton died at age 96 on March 17, 2018. The Milton T. Edgerton, M.D. Professorship in Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery at Johns Hopkins is named in Edgerton’s honor.
This paper reviews the senior author’s long-term experience with the surgical-psychiatric treatment of 100 aesthetic surgery patients with significant psychological disturbances. Patients with psychological disturbances of a magnitude generally considered an “absolute contraindication” for surgery were operated on and later assessed to determine the psychological impact of surgery. Patient follow-up averaged 6.2 years (maximum follow-up 25.7 years). Of the 87 patients who underwent operation (7 patients were refused surgery and 6 voluntarily deferred surgery), 82.8 percent had a positive psychological outcome, 13.8 percent experienced “minimal” improvement from surgery, and 3.4 percent were negatively affected by surgery. There were no lawsuits, suicides, or psychotic decompensations. Patients with severe psychological disturbances frequently benefited from combined surgical-psychiatric treatment designed to address the patient’s profound sense of deformity. This study suggests that plastic surgeons are “passing up” a significant number of patients who may be helped by combined surgical-psychological intervention. Comment in: * Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992 Aug;90(2):333-5.* Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992 Jun;89(6):1173-5.
This article describes plastic surgery patients who sought symmetrical recontouring of the width of the face and skull. The basic demographic and personality characteristics of these facial width deformity (FWD) patients and the surgical procedures performed on them are discussed. Details of the surgical and psychological management of three representative cases are given. Speculative conclusions regarding the general characteristics of the FWD population are offered. Suggestions are proposed for a combined surgical-medical psychotherapeutic collaboration in managing these patients.Comment in: * Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1990 Fall;14(4):299-300.
The evaluation and treatment of individuals with gender identity problems has resulted in an interesting and productive collaboration between several specialties of medicine. In particular, the psychiatrist and surgeon have joined hands in the management of these fascinating patients who feel they are trapped in the wrong body and insist upon correcting this cruel mistake of nature by undergoing sex reassignment surgery. Over the last two decades, some 40 centers have emerged in which interdisciplinary teams cooperate in the evaluation and treatment of these gender dysphoric patients. The model for this collaboration began at The Johns Hopkins Hospital, where the Gender Identity Clinic began its operation in 1965 (Edgerton, 1983; Pauly, 1983). This “gender identity movement” has brought together such unlikely collaborators as surgeons, endocrinologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, gynecologists, and research specialists into a mutually rewarding arena. This paper deals with the background and modern era of research into gender identity disorders and their evaluation and treatment. Finally, some data are presented on the outcome of sex reassignment surgery. This interdisciplinary collaboration has resulted in the birth of a new medical subspecialty, which deals with the study of gender identification and its disorders.
The increasing use of surgery for sex reassignment in the treatment of transsexualism is described. The author’s early experience over a twenty-year period with the Gender Identity teams at The Johns Hopkins University and The University of Virginia is summarized. Many of the reasons for slow acceptance of this type of surgery by many members of the medical profession are analyzed. The satisfactory subjective results described by patients who have received sex reassignment continue to exceed the results obtained by other methods. The author concludes that further study of surgical treatment is justified, but that it should be limited to established multidisciplinary teams working in academic settings. Physicians are urged to withhold judgment on the role of surgery in gender disorders until they have had significant personal experience with these desperate and complex patients.
Transsexualism is a poorly understood, uncommon, and controversial entity of recent interest to the lay public and medical profession. Important features of the condition are discussed, surgical procedures for genital conversion in male transsexuals are compared, and our experience at the University of Virginia where 53 patients have been treated surgically is presented. All patients have made satisfactory postoperative psychosocial adjustment despite a surgical complication rate approaching 50 per cent. It is concluded that alternative (better) surgical procedures for male transsexuals should be explored.
A 49-year-old male-to-female transsexual was administered voice therapy following surgery. Tape recordings were made of her speech prior to and each week during therapy. Selected sentences from these reocrdings were analyzed. Results indicate that changes in both fundamental frequency and perceptual judgments of femininity were statistically significant and supportive to the client. The voice of the client was still discernible from that of a female speaker, although less so than before therapy. It is suggested that a composite treatment program combined with laryngeal modification through surgical intervention may be necessary.
Turner, Edlich & Edgerton, 1978 Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Plastic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottville, VA, USA In structure and representation this publication is closely related to the one of Edgerton & Meyer (1973), that is, it is no follow-up study with reliable data. Related are mostly surgical techniques for MFTs and surgical complications. Under historical viewpoints it is an interesting statement that Edgerton was already in 1963 the director of the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic in Baltimore, MD, while everywhere else the founding of this institution is generally dated two years later. Also it is interesting that a psychologist is given a key role or a veto right to the indication to surgery. For the rest, the necessity for a successful one-year-long “Real-Life-Test” as it was already in Edgerton & Meyer (1973), the experimental surgical breast enlargement is recommended as a step if the patient and treatment provider are insecure regarding the stability of the female identity of the patient. In how far the statement: “The only justification for the ongoing evaluation of surgery as a definite treatment entity is that patients with this condition have proved resistant to psychotherapy and drug therapy” (p. 121) is a general postulate or if the corresponding possibility has been tested with those who underwent surgery is not to be discerned by the publication. It is reported about 53 gender reassignment surgeries of MFTs that Edgerton made after changing from Baltimore to Virginia. Forty seven females came to the follow-up study in the first year after surgery. Globally it is said that all were subjectively happy and self-secure and socially better adjusted. “Psychological testing has substantiated these subjective claims” (p. 128). Suicide attempts after surgery or desires to role re-reversal were not observed. Eighteen females had gotten married and six had adopted children. In the series of the first 20 surgically treated, 14 females required corrective surgery; in the series of the second 20, only eight. The most frequent complication was the stenosis of the vagina. Injuries of the urethra or rectum with corresponding fistulae did not occur.
Morgan RF, Morgan EA (2019). Milton T Edgerton, MD: A Pioneer of Surgery of the Hand. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery: March/April 2019 – Volume 30 – Issue 2 – p 303–305 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000005063
Resources
Archival contact information:
University of Virginia Medical Center, Gender Identity Clinic, P. O. Box 376 Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
Phone: (434) 924-5068
Thomas Steensma is a Dutch psychologist who researches gender diverse youth. Steensma’s research and clinical guidelines are frequently cited by anti-transgender extremists who reject affirmative models of care for young people seeking trans health services.
Steensma is also popular with anti-transgender activists for reporting high rates of “desistance” and “detransition.” Steensma co-authored a 2013 longitudinal study tracking 127 adolescents. approximately 37% continued with “gender dysphoria” (which they call “persisters”), while 63% did not (“desisters”) by age 15–16 .
Background
Thomas D. Steensma, works at the Department of Medical Psychology / Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Steensma’s research is focused on people of all ages with gender incongruence. Steensma’s primary projects focus on treatment evaluation, psychosexual development and (gender) identity development (including non-binary gender identities). Steensma studied social and clinical psychology, and is trained as a child and adolescent health psychologist.
“Desistance” research
In a 2013 paper, Steensma and co-authors stated that 63% of adolescents included in the study “desisted”:
Between 2000 and 2008, 225 children (144 boys, 81 girls) were consecutively referred to the clinic. From this sample, 127 adolescents were selected who were 15 years of age or older during the 4-year period of follow-up between 2008 and 2012. Of these adolescents, 47 adolescents (37%, 23 boys, 24 girls) were identified as persisters.
Because this is one of the highest “desistance” rates reported, anti-trans activists frequently cite this study. Critics have discussed methodological issues, particularly how to count people lost to follow-up / non-responders.
Press coverage
In 2018 KQED reported:
In Amsterdam, clinicians at the Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria are much more cautious about recommending social transitions because of the statistics on desistance. Thomas Steensma, a researcher and clinician at the center, acknowledges these studies probably included some kids who would not be diagnosed with gender dysphoria today. Nevertheless, despite the problems with the way they classified children, “the only evidence I have from studies and reports in the literature … is that not all transgender children will persist in their transgender identity,” Steensma said. ‘Why are we asking a child to conform to something that is not them because society hasn’t done its learning yet?’
In 2013, Steensma co-authored an oft-cited study that examined 127 adolescents, all of whom had displayed various levels of gender dysphoria as children. The researchers found that 80 of the children had desisted by the ages of 15 and 16. That works out to 63 percent of kids who basically stopped being transgender — a lower rate than in previous studies, but still a majority.
Some clinicians criticize this study, however, on methodological grounds, because the researchers defined anyone who did not return to their clinic as desisting. Fifty-two of the children classified as desistors or their parents did send back questionnaires showing the subjects’ present lack of gender dysphoria. But 28 neither responded nor could be tracked down.
van Dijken, J. B., Steensma, T. D., Wensing-Kruger, S. A., den Heijer, M., & Dreijerink, K. M. A. (2023). Tailored Gender-Affirming Hormone Treatment in Nonbinary Transgender Individuals: A Retrospective Study in a Referral Center Cohort. Transgender Health, 8(3), 220–225. https://doi.org/10.1089/trgh.2021.0032
van der Loos, M. A. T. C., Klink, D. T., Hannema, S. E., Bruinsma, S., Steensma, T. D., Kreukels, B. P. C., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., de Vries, A. L. C., den Heijer, M., & Wiepjes, C. M. (2023). Children and adolescents in the Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria: trends in diagnostic- and treatment trajectories during the first 20 years of the Dutch Protocol. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 20(3), 398–409. https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdac029
Pang, K. C., Hoq, M., & Steensma, T. D. (2022). Negative Media Coverage as a Barrier to Accessing Care for Transgender Children and Adolescents. JAMA Network Open, 5(2), e2138623. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.38623
Pang, K. C., de Graaf, N. M., Chew, D., Hoq, M., Keith, D. R., Carmichael, P., & Steensma, T. D. (2020). Association of Media Coverage of Transgender and Gender Diverse Issues With Rates of Referral of Transgender Children and Adolescents to Specialist Gender Clinics in the UK and Australia. JAMA Network Open, 3(7), e2011161. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.11161
Indremo, M., Jodensvi, A. C., Arinell, H., Isaksson, J., & Papadopoulos, F. C. (2022). Association of Media Coverage on Transgender Health With Referrals to Child and Adolescent Gender Identity Clinics in Sweden. JAMA Network Open, 5(2), e2146531. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.46531
Chong, L. S. H., Kerklaan, J., Clarke, S., Kohn, M., Baumgart, A., Guha, C., Tunnicliffe, D. J., Hanson, C. S., Craig, J. C., & Tong, A. (2021). Experiences and Perspectives of Transgender Youths in Accessing Health Care. JAMA Pediatrics, 175(11), 1159. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.2061
Pham, A., Morgan, A. R., Kerman, H., Albertson, K., Crouch, J. M., Inwards-Breland, D. J., Ahrens, K. R., & Salehi, P. (2020). How Are Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Youth Affected by the News? A Qualitative Study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(4), 478–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.11.304
Hughto, J. M. W., Pletta, D., Gordon, L., Cahill, S., Mimiaga, M. J., & Reisner, S. L. (2021). Negative Transgender-Related Media Messages Are Associated with Adverse Mental Health Outcomes in a Multistate Study of Transgender Adults. LGBT Health, 8(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0279
Bungener, S. L., Post, L., Berends, I., Steensma, T. D., de Vries ALC, & Popma, A. (2022). Talking About Sexuality with Youth: A Taboo in Psychiatry? The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 19(3), 421–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2022.01.001
Van Mello, N., De Nie, I., Asseler, J., Arnoldussen, M., Steensma, T., Den Heijer, M., de Vries ALC, & Huirne, J. (2022). P-506 Reflecting on the Importance of Family Building and Fertility Preservation: Transgender People’s Experiences with Starting Gender-affirming Treatment as Adolescent. Human Reproduction, 37(Supplement_1). https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deac107.469
Arnoldussen, M., van der Miesen, A. I. R., Elzinga, W. S., Alberse, A.-M. E., Popma, A., Steensma, T. D., de Vries ALC(2022). Self-Perception of Transgender Adolescents After Gender-Affirming Treatment: A Follow-Up Study into Young Adulthood. LGBT Health, 9(4), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0494
de Rooij, F. P. W., van der Sluis, W. B., Ronkes, B. L., Steensma, T. D., Al-Tamimi, M., van Moorselaar, R. J. A., Bouman, M.-B., & Pigot, G. L. S. (2022). MP20-09 Comparison of clinical outcomes after phalloplasty with versus without urethral lengthening in transgender men. Journal of Urology, 207(Supplement 5). https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000002553.09
van der Vaart, L. R., Verveen, A., Bos, H. M., van Rooij, F. B., & Steensma, T. D. (2022). Differences in self-perception and social gender status in children with gender incongruence. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27(4), 1077–1090. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591045221099394
de Rooij, F. P. W., van der Sluis, W. B., Ronkes, B. L., Steensma, T. D., Al-Tamimi, M., van Moorselaar, R. J. A., Bouman, M.-B., & Pigot, G. L. S. (2022). Comparison of surgical outcomes and urinary functioning after phalloplasty with versus without urethral lengthening in transgender men. International Journal of Transgender Health, 24(4), 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2110548
van der Sluis, W. B., Bruin, R. J. M. de, Steensma, T. D., & Bouman, M.-B. (2021). Gender-affirmation surgery and bariatric surgery in transgender individuals in The Netherlands: Considerations, surgical techniques and outcomes. International Journal of Transgender Health, 23(3), 355–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2021.1890302
de Graaf, N. M., Huisman, B., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Twist, J., Hage, K., Carmichael, P., Kreukels, B. P. C., & Steensma, T. D. (2021). Psychological Functioning in Non-binary Identifying Adolescents and Adults. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 47(8), 773–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623x.2021.1950087
van der Sluis, W. B., de Nie, I., Steensma, T. D., van Mello, N. M., Lissenberg-Witte, B. I., & Bouman, M.-B. (2021). Surgical and demographic trends in genital gender-affirming surgery in transgender women: 40 years of experience in Amsterdam. British Journal of Surgery, 109(1), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab213
Kennedy, E., Lane, C., Stynes, H., Ranieri, V., Spinner, L., Carmichael, P., Omar, R., Vickerstaff, V., Hunter, R., Senior, R., Butler, G., Baron-Cohen, S., de Graaf, N., Steensma, T. D., de Vries ALC, Young, B., & King, M. (2021). Longitudinal Outcomes of Gender Identity in Children (LOGIC): study protocol for a retrospective analysis of the characteristics and outcomes of children referred to specialist gender services in the UK and the Netherlands. BMJ Open, 11(11), e054895. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054895
Verveen, A., Kreukels, B. P., de Graaf, N. M., & Steensma, T. D. (2021). Body image in children with gender incongruence. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 26(3), 839–854. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591045211000797
MJA Verbeek, MA Hommes, TD Steensma, AER Bos, J van Lankveld (2021). Transgender specific problem situations experienced during transition: Development of a Transgender Coping Questionnaire part 1. 4th EPATH Hybrid Conference: Reconnecting and Redefining Transgender Healthcare 2021https://epath.eu/past-conferences/conference-2021/
Castellini G, Ristori J, Steensma T (2021). Psychopathology in adult transgender people. European Psychiatry. 2021;64(S1):S47-S47. https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.151
de Vries ALC, Beek, T. F., Dhondt, K., de Vet, H. C. W., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Steensma, T. D., & Kreukels, B. P. C. (2021). Reliability and Clinical Utility of Gender Identity-Related Diagnoses: Comparisons Between the ICD-11, ICD-10, DSM-IV, and DSM-5. LGBT Health, 8(2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0272
Spizzirri, G., Eufrásio, R., Lima, M.C.P. et al. (2021). Proportion of people identified as transgender and non-binary gender in Brazil. Sci Rep11, 2240 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81411-4
Claahsen – van der Grinten, H., Verhaak, C., Steensma, T., Middelberg, T., Roeffen, J., & Klink, D. (2020). Gender incongruence and gender dysphoria in childhood and adolescence—current insights in diagnostics, management, and follow-up. European Journal of Pediatrics, 180(5), 1349–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-020-03906-y
Bungener, Sara. L., de Vries ALC, Popma, A., & Steensma, T. D. (2020). Sexual Experiences of Young Transgender Persons During and After Gender-Affirmative Treatment. Pediatrics, 146(6), e20191411. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-1411
de Graaf, N. M., Steensma, T. D., Carmichael, P., VanderLaan, D. P., Aitken, M., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., de Vries ALC, Kreukels, B. P. C., Wasserman, L., Wood, H., Zucker KJ (2020). Suicidality in clinic-referred transgender adolescents. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 31(1), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-020-01663-9
Steensma TD, Wensing-Kruger SA, Klink D (2017). How Should Physicians Help Gender-Transitioning Adolescents Consider Potential Iatrogenic Harms of Hormone Therapy? (2017). AMA Journal of Ethics, 19(8), 762–770. https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.8.ecas3-1708
de Vries ALC, Steensma, T.D., Cohen-Kettenis, P.T., VanderLaan DP, Zucker KJ (2016). Poor peer relations predict parent- and self-reported behavioral and emotional problems of adolescents with gender dysphoria: a cross-national, cross-clinic comparative analysis. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry25, 579–588 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-015-0764-7
Steensma TD, McGuire JK, Kreukels BPC, Beekman AJ, Cohen-Kettenis P.T (2013). Factors Associated With Desistence and Persistence of Childhood Gender Dysphoria: A Quantitative Follow-Up Study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (Vol. 52, Issue 6, pp. 582–590). Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2013.03.016
Temple Newhook, J., Pyne, J., Winters, K., Feder, S., Holmes, C., Tosh, J., Sinnott, M.-L., Jamieson, A., & Pickett, S. (2018). A critical commentary on follow-up studies and “desistance” theories about transgender and gender-nonconforming children. International Journal of Transgenderism, 19(2), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390
Zucker KJ (2018). The myth of persistence: Response to “A critical commentary on follow-up studies and ‘desistance’ theories about transgender and gender non-conforming children” by Temple Newhook et al. (2018). International Journal of Transgenderism, 19(2), 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1468293
Steensma, T. D., Biemond, R., de Boer, F., Cohen-Kettenes PT (2011). Desisting and persisting gender dysphoria after childhood: A qualitative follow-up study. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16(4), 499–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104510378303
Pedagogische en Onderwijswetenschappen (UvA) with Henny Bos and Thomas Steensma (Apr 14, 2021). Gender – Preventieve Jeugdhulp en Opvoeding. [Gender – Preventive Youth Care and Education] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU5JweVHLeU
