Kathryn Sandra Kaur Hall (born 1958) is a Canadian psychologist who with coauthor Yitzchak M. Binik has promoted pathologizing ideas about sex and gender minorities. Their 2014 book Principles and Practice of Sex Therapy presents the response to the 2003 anti-transgender book The Man Who Would Be Queen as that of “some militant gender activists.” It also allows psychologists Kenneth Zucker and Nicola Brown to make the case for non-affirmative models of care for minors. Zucker was fired the year after the book’s publication.
Background
Hall earned her Bachelor’s degree from Queen’s University in 1980 and her Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from McGill University in 1986. Her husband is sports psychologist James L. “Jim” Mastrich, Jr. (born 1952).
Passage from Principles and Practice of Sex Therapy
The Future of Sex Therapy
The relationship between sexual dysfunction and the other sexual disorders might be best characterized as a DSM-arranged marriage. Paraphilia and gender dysphoria clinicians and researchers have usually not been sex therapists. Yet in the view of previous DSMs and most of the North American mental health community, all sexual and gender issues are alike. The net result is that the sexual dysfunctions, paraphilias, and gender identity disorders have all been thrown into a single DSM chapter. This is not true in the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD) classification.
Whether sexuality is an important defining characteristic for gender dysphoria is matter of some controversy. Brown and Zucker (Chapter 11) point out that autogynephilia—that is, sexual arousal to the idea of oneself being a woman—may be a crucial mechanism in male-to-female gender dysphoria and that this “erotic location error” is considered by some as a sexual orientation. This theory has aroused bitter controversy, as evidenced by the recent brouhaha between J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and some militant gender activists (see special issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior, June 2008). Brown and Zucker also review the intervention literature and summarize the substantive changes in the DSM-5 diagnosis.
References
Binik YM, Hall SKS (2014). The Future of Sex Therapy. In Principles and Practice of Sex Therapy, Fifth Edition. Guilford Publications. Edited by Yitzchak M. Binik and Kathryn SK Hall. ISBN 978-1462513673
Note: In 2025, this site phased out AI illustrations after artist feedback. The previous illustration is here.
Irving Binik is an American-Canadian psychologist who promoted pathologizing ideas about sex and gender minorities.
Background
Yitzchak M. “Irv” Binik was born February 6, 1949. He grew up in Rochester, New York. He earned a bachelor’s degree from New York University and a bachelor’s degree from Jewish Theological Seminary in 1970. He then attended University of Pennsylvania earning a master’s degree in 1972 and a doctorate in 1975,
He taught at McGill University from 1975 until his retirement.
He studied factors that affect sexual response in women in women and men, including menopause and circumcision He believed sexual pain should be reclassified from a sex disorder to a pain disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
In 2008, Binik was selected for the DSM-V Sexual & Gender Identity Disorders Work Group chaired by Kenneth Zucker.
2014 anti-transgender book
Binik and Kathryn S.K. Hall edited the 2014 book Principles and Practice of Sex Therapy. They present the response to the 2003 anti-transgender book The Man Who Would Be Queen as that of “some militant gender activists.” It also allows psychologists Kenneth Zucker and Nicola Brown to make the case for non-affirmative models of care for minors. Zucker was fired the year after the book’s publication.
The Future of Sex Therapy
The relationship between sexual dysfunction and the other sexual disorders might be best characterized as a DSM-arranged marriage. Paraphilia and gender dysphoria clinicians and researchers have usually not been sex therapists. Yet in the view of previous DSMs and most of the North American mental health community, all sexual and gender issues are alike. The net result is that the sexual dysfunctions, paraphilias, and gender identity disorders have all been thrown into a single DSM chapter. This is not true in the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD) classification.
Whether sexuality is an important defining characteristic for gender dysphoria is matter of some controversy. Brown and Zucker (Chapter 11) point out that autogynephilia—that is, sexual arousal to the idea of oneself being a woman—may be a crucial mechanism in male-to-female gender dysphoria and that this “erotic location error” is considered by some as a sexual orientation. This theory has aroused bitter controversy, as evidenced by the recent brouhaha between J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and some militant gender activists (see special issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior, June 2008). Brown and Zucker also review the intervention literature and summarize the substantive changes in the DSM-5 diagnosis.
References
Binik YM, Hall KSK, Eds. (2014). Principles and Practice of Sex Therapy, Fifth Edition. Guilford Publications. ISBN 9781462513673
Note: In 2025, this site phased out AI illustrations after artist feedback. The previous illustration is here.
Ronald J. “Ron” Comer (born April 26, 1947) is an American psychologist who wrote the textbooks Abnormal Psychology and Fundamentals in Abnormal Psychology which promote pathologizing ideas about transgender people proposed by Ray Blanchard.
Background
Comer earned a degree in psychology from the University of Pennsylvania in 1969 and a Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Clark University in 1975. He joined the Princeton faculty in 1975 as an assistant professor and then transitioned to a lecturer with continuing appointment. He was appointed Emeritus Professor in February 2016.
Jeffrey Paul Robbins (born circa 1950) is an American editor best known for editing and fact-checking one of the most transphobic books ever written, The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey.
My editor, Jeff Robbins, at Joseph Henry Press, made my writing better than I could. (pp. xii-xiii)
Correspondence
Below is the letter I sent Robbins on May 17, 2003.
Jeffrey Robbins, Senior Editor The Joseph Henry Press 36 Dartmouth St. #810 Malden, MA 02148 Tel. 781-324-4786 Fax 781-397-8255 E-mail: [email protected]
Mr. Robbins–
I maintain an “Our Bodies, Ourselves” type website for transsexual women called tsroadmap.com.
After my business partner’s boyfriend Barry Winchell was beaten to death with a baseball bat because he was dating her, I expanded my efforts from practical matters of gender transition to improving media depictions of our condition.
I am writing to you today because of your involvement in J. Michael Bailey’s The Man Who Would Be Queen. In it, Bailey states that you edited this book and “made my writing better than I could.” (xii-xiii)
Mr. Robbins, you are complicit in the publication of what many in my community believe is the most defamatory book on transsexualism written since 1979. You are responsible for allowing us to be associated with depraved murderers (p. 142) and to be described as little more than socially stunted deviants generally unable to form long-term relationships or even hold “conventional jobs.” (p. 188). Imagine if the following were said about women you know:
“[They] work as waitresses, hairdressers, receptionists, strippers, and prostitutes, as well as in many other occupations.” (p. 142)
I intend to see that you remain clearly linked to this historical document and are held accountable for this outrage during the remainder of your career. I also plan to secure your shameful place in the history of our community’s struggle to enjoy the same basic rights afforded other women. Make no mistake: you will have helped to hurt a great many women and children before we get those rights, and I can assure you your efforts will not go unnoticed.
I will be re-reading the entire text as well and making a painstaking record of all the ways you and Bailey have hurt all of us by bringing out such bigotry in the name of “science.” I will be sending my full findings to the National Academies leadership later this year.
The fact that any publisher allowed this to be printed under the auspices of “science” raises serious concerns about the process by which books are subjected to review at Joseph Henry Press. I intend to assist with the full investigation into how you personally allowed this to happen.
Though I doubt you are, you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.
[signed]
cc: Barbara Kline Pope, Director Phone: 202-334-3328 E-mail: [email protected]
Robbins did not respond. Below is the form letter sent out by Suzanne Woolsey to anyone who wrote to them. I received my copy on May 22, 2003.
We have received your message about the book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, by J. Michael Bailey, and I am responding on behalf of the National Academies. We appreciate knowing of your concerns and recognize that the contents of this book are controversial. The copyright page of the book carries the following notice: “Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this volume are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences or its affiliated institutions.” This statement applies to all books published by the Joseph Henry Press. Joseph Henry Press publications are not reports of the National Academies, but are individually authored works on topics related to science, engineering, and medicine.
In our opinion, the best response to writing with which one disagrees is more writing. Those who hold views contrary to those expressed in this book are encouraged to present and publish the evidence and reasoning in support of their conclusions.
Sincerely, Suzanne H. Woolsey, Ph.D. Chief Communications Officer
Publishers Weekly is an American weekly trade news magazine targeted at publishers, librarians, booksellers, and literary agents.
Bailey’s publisher Joseph Henry Press has been using an excerpt of this review in its publicity, including an ad that ran in The Advocate. The bold part is the selective quotation they use, wisely avoiding the critical part after.
An associate professor of psychology at Northwestern University, Bailey writes with assuredness that often makes difficult, abstract material-the relationship between sexual orientation and gender affect, the origins of homosexuality and the theoretical basis of how we discuss sexuality-comprehensible. He also, especially in his portraits of the women and men he writes about, displays a deep empathy that is frequently missing from scientific studies of sexuality. But Bailey’s scope is so broad that when he gets down to pivotal constructs, as in detailing the data of scientific studies such as Richard Green’s about “feminine boys” or Dean Hamer’s work on the so-called “gay gene,” the material is vague, and not cohesive. Bailey tends towards overreaching, unsupported generalizations, such his claim that “regardless of marital laws there will always be fewer gay men who are romantically attached” or that the African-American community is “a relatively anti-gay ethnic minority.” Add to this the debatable supposition that innate “masculine” and “feminine” traits, in the most general sense of the words, decidedly exist, and his account as a whole loses force.
Jeff Sherman is a social psychologist and longtime supporter of J. Michael Bailey. I got the following note on May 7, 2003. Sherman’s comment in bold reflects typical thinking from anti-transgender psychologists. Sherman ignores that Bailey was mocking transgender people, including our young children, on his book tour. Apparently Sherman thinks it’s fine for Bailey to do that to our children while “trying to find the truth,” but any reciprocation is “vile.” Via Sherman:
you are a vile human being for putting pictures of mike’s kids on your web site. you disagree with mike’s theories? fine. there is ample opportunity for scientific debate, and no one more than mike welcomes a scientific critique of his work. to ascribe any motives to mike beyond trying to find the truth is nothing more than an attempt to stifle free and open discourse. you should hook up with kansas state legislature.
sincerely, jeff sherman
***************************************************************** Jeffrey W. Sherman Associate Professor Department of Psychology Northwestern University 2029 Sheridan Rd. Evanston, IL 60208-2710 phone: 847-467-4133 fax: 847-491-7859 url: www.psych.nwu.edu/People/JeffSherman.htm ******************************************************************
WEB LINK: http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/psych/people/faculty/sherman/sherman.html email: [email protected]
My reply in part:
It’s what he’s doing to my kids in his lectures. “Vile” is an apt descriptor. May I borrow it?
Maybe Mike should open his lecture to the parents of those kids whose images he features. I wonder how they’d feel to see their children’s expressions of pain being used by Mike to amuse audiences? I bet they’d think he’s a pretty vile human being. I certainly do.
Sherman did not follow up.
Michael Seto is a Canadian psychologist whose work focuses on sex and gender minorities.
He has used disease models to describe trans people, including the deprecated and unscientific term “gynandromorph.” No reputable scientist uses this term for humans. It is only used by transphobes in the context of attraction to transgender people. The disease “gynandromorphophilia” was created by Peter Collins and Ray Blanchard, two transphobic colleagues of Seto’s. Blanchard has published articles with Seto. Collins has quoted research by Seto in testimony about the use of child-sized sex dolls as a possible way to prevent sex offenses against children.
Background
Seto was born in 1967. He earned a bachelor’s degree in psychology from University of British Columbia in 1989. He then earned a master’s degree from Queen’s University in 1992, followed by a doctorate in 1997.
He worked at notorious anti-transgender facility CAMH from 1998 to 2008. Much of his research focuses on adolescent sex offenders, minor attracted persons, and child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
University of Ottawa Institute for Mental Health Research
He became editor of Sexual Abuse in 2015 and consulting editor of Journal of Sex Research in 2014. Carleton University University of Ottawa University of Toronto
He is married to sexologist Meredith Chivers. In 2003, Chivers and Seto sat on a panel at the Kinsey Institute with J. Michael Bailey as part of a multidisciplinary group of researchers in sexual psychophysiology.
Seto’s Wikipedia bio was written by anti-transgender troll James Cantor, who is now banned. Seto has made additional edits to it himself.
“Gynandromorphs”
In science, a gynandromorph is an animal with bilateral intersex traits and sex mosaics. Gynandromorph has never been used by scientists to describe mammals, let alone primates like humans. No human has ever been observed with bilateral intersex traits.
Seto’s beliefs and unscientific terminology have made their way into publications like Reason:
Even the gender dimension is more complex than most realize, writes Seto, with some people “attracted to gynandromorphs, that is… individuals with physical features of both sexes … other individuals who are attracted specifically to transgender people, and those who would describe themselves as more pansexual with regard to gender, for example, being attracted to both cis- and trans-gender women or men.”
Selected publications
Seto, M. C., & Barbaree, H. E. (1999). Psychopathy, treatment behavior, and sex offenders recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14 (12), 1235-1248.
Seto, M. C., Khattar, N. A., Lalumiere, M. L. & Quinsey, V. L. (1997). Deception and sexual strategy in psychopathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 22 (3), 301-307.
Chivers, M. L., Seto, M. C., & Blanchard, R. (2007). Gender and sexual orientation differences in sexual response to sexual activities versus gender of actors in sexual films. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 1108–1121. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.1108
Seto, M. C., Cantor, J. M., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(3), 610–615. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.610
Seto MC (2017). The Puzzle of Male Chronophilias. Arch Sex Behav. 2017 Jan;46(1):3-22. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0799-y. Epub 2016 Aug 22.
Chivers ML, Seto MC, Blanchard R (2007). Gender and sexual orientation differences in sexual response to sexual activities versus gender of actors in sexual films. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93, 1108–1121.
Seto, Michael C. (2018). Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children: Theory, Assessment, and Intervention. American Psychological Association ISBN 978-1433829260
Seto, Michael C. (2013). Internet Sex Offenders. American Psychological Association ISBN 978-1433813641
CAMH (2004). Psychobiology of Aggression and Antisocial Behaviour across the Lifespan. http://www.camh.net/research/research_psychobiology.html [archive]
Kinsey Institute (2003). Methodological Approaches In Reproductive Psychophysiology Saturday July 12 – Tuesday July 15, 2003 http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/services/psychophys.html [archive]
Michael Kuban is a Canadian psychologist who served as manager of the Kurt Freund Phallometric Lab at the notorious Clarke Institute in Toronto.
Background
Michael Edward “Mike” Kuban was born in 1962 and earned a bachelor’s degree from University of Lethbridge in 1987, then attended University of Toronto, earning master’s degrees in 1992, 1996, and 2000.
Kuban began working at the Clarke Institute in 1990. In 2015, Kuban began working with therapist Rob Peach.
Freund K, Kuban M (1993). Toward a testable developmental model of pedophilia: The development of erotic age preference. Child Abuse & Neglect , vol. 17, 1993, pp. 315-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(93)90051-6
Blanchard R, Barbaree HE, Bogaert AF, Dickey R, Klassen P, Kuban ME, Zucker KJ (2000). Fraternal birth order and sexual orientation in pedophiles. Arch Sex Behav. 2000 Oct;29(5):463-78. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001943719964
Blanchard R, Klassen P, Dickey R, Kuban ME, Blak T (2001). Sensitivity and specificity of the phallometric test for pedophilia in nonadmitting sex offenders. Psychol Assess. 2001 Mar;13(1):118-26. https://goi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.13.1.118
Blanchard R, Christensen BK, Strong SM, Cantor JM, Kuban ME, Klassen P, Dickey R, Blak T (2002). Retrospective self-reports of childhood accidents causing unconsciousness in phallometrically diagnosed pedophiles. Arch Sex Behav. 2002 Dec;31(6):511-26. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020659331965
Blanchard R, Kuban ME, Klassen P, Dickey R, Christensen BK, Cantor JM, Blak T (2003). Self-reported head injuries before and after age 13 in pedophilic and nonpedophilic men referred for clinical assessment. Arch Sex Behav. 2003 Dec;32(6):573-81. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026093612434
Cantor JM, Blanchard R, Christensen BK, Dickey R, Klassen PE, Beckstead AL, Blak T, Kuban ME (2004). Intelligence, memory, and handedness in pedophilia. Neuropsychology. 2004 Jan;18(1):3-14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.18.1.3
Mark Henderson (born 1974) is a British journalist and communications executive. Henderson was a science correspondent at The Times of London when he recommended the anti-transgender 2003 book The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey.
Background
Henderson graduated from Oxford in 1996 with a bachelor’s degree in modern history. He worked as a science correspondent for The Times from 2000 to 2006, then as a science editor from 2006 to 2011. In 2012, Henderson became Director of Communications for the Wellcome Trust.
He has also published books:
50 Genetics Ideas You Really Need to Know (2009)
The Geek Manifesto (2012)
Bailey book review (2003)
Henderson recommends a number of hereditarian titles in the same article, including:
Matt Ridley’s Nature via Nurture
Simon Baron-Cohen’s The Essential Difference
Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything
Peter Atkins’ Galileo’s Finger
James Watson’s: DNA: The Secret of Life
Brenda Maddox’s Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA
Maurice Wilkins’ The Third Man of the Double Helix
Robert Mash’s How to Keep Dinosaurs
J. Michael Bailey’s The Man Who Would Be Queen
Much language in Henderson’s Bailey review below echoes Steven Pinker‘s review in The Guardian.
Who’s got the brains in this relationship?
The Man Who Would Be Queen (Joseph Henry, £17.95; offer £14.36) by J. Michael Bailey, looks at the psychology and physiology of male transsexualism and homosexuality. Compassionate without attempting to be politically correct, Bailey examines the science behind sexual orientation and identity, using original and rigorous research. It will interest anyone with curiosity about the variety of human sexuality.
Joan Aileen Winer Linsenmeier (born October 30, 1950) is an American psychologist best known for publishing biased and irresponsible research on sex and gender minorities with her longtime Northwestern University collaborator J. Michael Bailey. Linsenmeier is credited by Bailey in The Man Who Would Be Queen as a collaborator who read the entire manuscript and offered suggestions.
Among Linsenmeier’s published collaborations with colleagues:
questioning if bisexual men exist (Rieger 2013)
rating the attractiveness of “feminine” children (Rieger 2011)
claiming “homosexual transsexuals” are especially well-suited to prostitution (Bailey 2003)
Background
Linsenmeier earned a BA in Mathematics and Psychology from Carnegie Mellon University in 1972. She earned her PhD at Northwestern in 1977 and taught there until her retirement in about 2015.
She married Northwestern neurobiologist Robert Alan Linsenmeier, who taught at Northwestern from 1983 until his retirement in 2019.
My email to Dr. Linsenmeier
17 May 2003
Joan Linsenmeier Senior Lecturer, Associate Director of Undergraduate Studies Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Psychology Swift Hall 311, 2029 Sheridan Road Evanston, IL 60208-2710 Phone: (847) 491-7834 Fax: (847) 491-7859 Web: http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/~jlins/ E-mail: [email protected]
Dr. Linsenmeier–
My name is Andrea James. I maintain an Our Bodies, Ourselves type website for transsexual women called tsroadmap.com.
After my business partner’s boyfriend Barry Winchell was beaten to death with a baseball bat because he was dating her, I expanded my efforts from practical matters of gender transition to improving media depictions of our condition.
I am writing to you today because of your involvement in J. Michael Bailey’s The Man Who Would Be Queen. In it, Bailey states that you “read the entire manuscript and made sure my thoughts were clear.” (p. xii-xiii).
Dr. Linsenmeier, you are complicit in the publication of what many in my community believe is the most defamatory book on transsexualism written since 1979. You are responsible for allowing us to be associated with depraved murderers (p. 142) and to be described as little more than socially stunted deviants generally unable to form long-term relationships or even hold conventional jobs. (p. 188). Imagine if the following were said about women you know:
[They] work as waitresses, hairdressers, receptionists, strippers, and prostitutes, as well as in many other occupations. (p. 142)
I intend to see that you remain clearly linked to this historical document and are held accountable for this outrage during the remainder of your career. I also plan to secure your shameful place in the history of our community’s struggle to enjoy the same basic rights afforded other women. Make no mistake: you will have helped to hurt a great many women and children before we get those rights, and I can assure you your efforts will not go unnoticed.
I will be re-reading the entire manuscript as well and making a painstaking record of all the ways you and Bailey have hurt all of us by bringing out such bigotry in the name of science.
Though I doubt you are, you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.
Andrea James
Linsenmeier’s reply
18 May 2003
[my follow-up comments indented]
Andrea,
It is my sincere hope that the publication of Mike Bailey’s book will lead to further research on what I think are some very important issues. In my view, there is much more to be learned about many of the topics he addresses.
Thanks for your reply, Joan. We are in complete agreement here.
I am currently teaching a course in which we are reading books written for a popular audience by highly respected psychology professors. Throughout the course, I have tried to make the point that what’s in these books is not necessarily the final word on the topics we are studying. Rather, the books are the sincere efforts of top-notch scientists to communicate what they feel is currently known about these topics.
I feel Bailey’s work on transsexualism is anything but sincere, and anything but top-notch. I am not exaggerating when I say you and he have brought out the worst book on transsexualism in a quarter century. I will be collecting responses and shaping my case for the next several months here:
I encourage my students to read the books with some degree of skepticism, to think about alternative explanations of findings the authors present, to think about the match between what is in the texts and what they have seen in their own lives — and about the possible reasons for any discrepancies.
You and Bailey didn’t bother with the alternative explanations, and you did not discuss that your ideas on transsexualism are based on a questionable theory by a fringe element of academia. If you find yourself teaching Bailey, I suggest giving your students True Selves as an antidote, and the Milton Diamond piece at the top of my Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence clearinghouse, or send them to my Annotated Bailey when it’s done. I’m sure college kids will find it an entertaining read— it’s written to entertain and educate the high school and college aged women who read my site.
Even thought [sic] they are only first-year students, I encourage them to see science as a process, not as a fixed body of facts, and to speculate about future research projects that might answer remaining questions. This is how I anticipated that Mike Bailey’s book would be read also: as a sincere effort by a top-notch scientist to communicate what he feels is known at this point about the topics he studies and writes on — and as a stimulus to further thinking and research.
You have brought out what I consider to be The Bell Curve of transsexualism: bigotry cross-dressed in academic robes. I intend to show exactly how prejudicial the two of you are.
I would also like you to know that, in my role as an editorial consultant to Mike Bailey, there were certainly points where I suggested toning down some language, or presenting some ideas in a more tentative manner.
Then you failed miserably in making your case.
Throughout, however, my role was just to respectfully ask questions and make suggestions. The final language and content were always his.
Considering that I have found only three changes to date comparing Bailey’s manuscript to the published chapters on transsexualism, none of which are substantive, your questions and suggestions were apparently given as much credence as my own comments to him in May 2000.
If you actually did make any suggestions, Mike didn’t seem to consider your opinions to have much merit. In that sense, I suppose we both failed miserably. If you feel moved to write something explaining how your opinion on transsexualism differs from Bailey’s, or a piece outlining some of the specific suggestions you made, I will be happy to give it a permanent home online, on the page dedicated to your involvement in this historical book. Let me know. I respond to all emails. Andrea James
Linsenmeier’s reply
I think exposing students to disagreements is an excellent teaching technique, so if I do ever teach a course where this book is relevant, I’ll certainly consider your suggestions. Having students puzzle through ideas that don’t seem to fit together is a good way to get them to think — and, again, to see science as a process, with lots still to be learned. In fact, having them do their own Annotated ______ (where ______ is some author I do assign) might be a great assignment to give sometime.
I’m not an expert on any of the topics Mike covers in his book. That was not my role in reading the manuscript and giving feedback. Partly because of my lack of expertise, one thing I can say with confidence is that I don’t know if the two types Mike presents in the chapters on transsexualism are the only types [or] not. It certainly seems conceivable to me that the answer is no and that the full story is actually more complicated.
Many things I learned in my psychology classes as a student in the 1960s/70s turned out to be only part of the whole story. This has certainly been true when it comes to research on sex and gender. (As an aside, I find it interesting that when I was a student at Northwestern, I took a course called something like The Psychology of Sex Differences, but now we have, instead, a course called Psychology of Gender.) After all these years of additional work in this area, we’re still learning. As you noted in your response to my earlier message, one thing you and I agree on is that there’s more to be learned about the topics that Mike Bailey has chosen to address in his book.
Bailey JM, Kim PY, Hills A, Linsenmeier JA (1997). Butch, femme, or straight acting? Partner preferences of gay men and lesbians. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997 Nov;73(5):960-73.
Li NP, Bailey JM, Kenrick DT, Linsenmeier JA (2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: testing the tradeoffs. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Jun;82(6):947-55.
Skidmore WC, Linsenmeier JA, Bailey JM (2006). Gender nonconformity and psychological distress in lesbians and gay men. Arch Sex Behav. 2006 Dec;35(6):685-97. Epub 2006 Nov 16.
Rieger G, Linsenmeier JA, Gygax L, Bailey JM (2008). Sexual Orientation and Childhood Gender Nonconformity: Evidence From Home Videos. Dev Psychol. 2008 Jan;44(1):46-58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.46.
Childhood Gender Nonconformity Remains a Robust and Neutral Correlate of Sexual Orientation: Reply to Hegarty (2009).
Sylva D, Rieger G, Linsenmeier JA, Bailey JM (2010). Concealment of sexual orientation. Arch Sex Behav. 2010 Feb;39(1):141-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9466-2. Epub 2009 Jan 24.
Rieger G, Linsenmeier JA, Gygax L, Garcia S, Bailey JM (2010). Dissecting “gaydar”: Accuracy and the role of masculinity-femininity. Arch Sex Behav. 2010 Feb;39(1):124-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9405-2. Epub 2008 Sep 23.
Valentova J, Rieger G, Havlicek J, Linsenmeier JA, Bailey JM (2011). Judgments of sexual orientation and masculinity-femininity based on thin slices of behavior: A cross-cultural comparison. Arch Sex Behav. 2011 Dec;40(6):1145-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9818-1.
Rieger G, Gygax L, Linsenmeier JA, Siler-Knogl A, Moskowitz DA, Bailey JM (2011). Sex typicality and attractiveness in childhood and adulthood: Assessing their relationships from videos. Arch Sex Behav. 2011 Feb;40(1):143-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9512-8. Epub 2009 Jul 9.
Rieger G, Rosenthal AM, Cash BM, Linsenmeier JA, Bailey JM, Savin-Williams RC (2013). Male bisexual arousal: A matter of curiosity? Biol Psychol. 2013 Dec;94(3):479-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.09.007 Epub 2013 Sep 17.
Resources
Joan Linsenmeier faculty page [archive] http://www.psych.nwu.edu/psych/people/faculty/linsenmeier/
Joan Linsenmeier faculty page [archive] http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/~jlins/
