Do not go to Morandini for therapy of any kind. Instead look for supportive local resources where practitioners do not promote unscientific ideas like “autogynephilia” or “autoandrophilia.”
Background
James Simon Morandini earned a bachelor’s degree in 2009 from University of Newcastle and a doctorate from University of Sydney in 2016. Morandini is the founder and director of King Street Psychology, the largest private gender clinic in Australia.
Morandini is the National Convener of the Australian Psychological Society Gender & Sexuality Interest group. Morandini is also a psychologist at The Gender Centre, founding a clinical psychology internship while there “to ensure the next generation of clinical psychs are trained in evidence based and culturally competent gender care.”
Anti-transgender activism
Morandini is an activist in the “autogynephilia” and “autoandrophilia” movements. These transphobic sex-fueled mental illnesses were created in 1989 and are supported by a small group of activists from sexology’s conservative fringe. Morandini claims to be interested in “understanding and destigmatising trans women/non-binary femmes who experience autogynephilia/autoheterosexuality.”
At the 2023 Puzzles of Sexual Orientation meeting, Morandini presented research titled “Bisexual Phenomena Among Autogynephilic Men.”
On October 26, 2023, Morandini respectfully requested that this page be removed or revised. The reasons mentioned included Morandini’s therapeutic support for hundreds of gender diverse adolescents and supportive involvement in trans-led organizations. My response is below.
Thank you for your message. The term “autogynephilia” is transphobic in the same way “nymphomania” is misogynistic. The issue is not the phenomenon, but your reification of an idea that is at its core biased and thus unscientific.
It took feminist activists over a century to convince misogynistic and biased scientists to stop using the term “nymphomania” because it is unscientific. It has taken trans activists and scientist allies decades to convince transphobes to stop using the term “autogynephilia.” You are one of the last holdouts.
I understand that some people have latched onto “autogynephile” as an identity the way some women latched onto “nymphomaniac” as an identity. “Autogynephilia” as a term appeals to a very specific type of person: neurodiverse, fixated on collecting and categorizing, socially isolated/eccentric, rigid thinking. That makes it very hard for them to let go of bad ideas, in the way it’s hard to convince believers that horoscopes or Myers-Briggs types are unscientific. It helps them make sense of the world, and they “see themselves” in the scheme.
Via Ekins and King (2012):
[Anne] Lawrence says that on reading Blanchardâs journal articles that she experienced the âkind of epiphany that trans people often feel when first coming across words and formulations that fit and work for themâ (Lawrence 1999a). Not only do they feel empowered to make sense of their predicament, but the formulations are proof to them that they are not alone.
People have invested their lives in this bad idea, and they succumb to the sunk cost fallacy rather than entertain the idea they might be mistaken about something so deeply important to them.
I know there is hope for someone like you. Even transphobic sexologists walked away from “erotic target location error” because of its obvious bias, replacing it with “identity inversion.” The issue is not the phenomenon, but the term. “Paraphilia” in general and “autogynephilia” in particular are based on a disease model that impedes scientific progress.
I have written extensively about value-neutral alternatives proposed by scientists and activists:
genderplay or gender play (used since middle 20th century)
I have also written extensively about value-neutral terms used by these communities to describe themselves, like fujoshi and sissy. The issue is not the phenomenon, but the biased term you are using.
Science proceeds through definitional refinement, and activism is an important part of guiding science toward value-neutral terminology.
If you are interested in learning about the bleak future of “autogynephilia” and its proponents, I recommend Nymphomania: A History by Carol Groneman.
I have spoken at The Gender Centre and consider it an important resource. I hope for the sake of your career and legacy that you reconsider your allegiance to a transphobic cult within sexology and within the community of sex and gender minorities.
Morandini, James (June 18, 2024). Understanding gender dysphoria.ReachOut Australia https://au.reachout.com/identity/gender/understanding-gender-dysphoria
Media
Kristina Anj (July 11, 2023). Transgender In A Blender: Episode 3 – Youth Is Not Wasted On The Young with James Morandini. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMvNkGQCogs [deleted]
Ray Blanchard is an American-Canadian psychologist and anti-transgender activist. Blanchard is a key historical figure in academic exploitation and oppression of sex and gender minorities.
Blanchard’s Toronto gender clinic rejected 90% of trans people seeking healthcare. Blanchard also created several obscure diseases to categorize trans people and those who love us, including the mental disorders “autogynephilia” and “gynandromorphophilia.”
Following a long career of gatekeeping trans healthcare and creating transphobic diseases, Blanchard has become a key figure in anti-transgender extremism.
Overview
See this biography for Blanchard’s background and motivations.
Blanchard’s “contributions” to the field of gender identity and expression to date have been:
Regressive requirements for access to medical service
Forced submission to sexualized testing in order to get access to medical services
An obscure and largely-forgotten disease model of gender identity cribbed from Magnus Hirschfeld
A disease model of attraction to transgender people, which Blanchard called “gynandromorphophilia.”
Blanchard created a system in which only two subgroups of people could get through the Clarke Institute/CAMH program:
“Homosexual transsexuals,” or “gay males” who fetishize straight men
“Autogynephilic transsexuals,” or “nonhomosexual males” who fetishize feminizing themselves
“A man without a penis… is in reality what you are creating.”
From a June 2004 article :
Toronto psychologist Ray Blanchard, one of Canada’s leading — and most controversial — gender experts, argues the transgender movement is rife with delusion. “This is not waving a magic wand and a man becomes a woman and vice versa,” he says. “It’s something that has to be taken very seriously. A man without a penis has certain disadvantages in this world, and this is in reality what you’re creating.” [1]
A 1984 article in the Toronto Star indicated that between 1969 and 1984, 90% of all people seeking trans health services were turned away at The Clarke. The Clarke averaged about 5 acceptances a year, totaling about 100 people. In other words, they denied access to over 900 applicants during that time. [2]
Blanchard’s program was more like a parole office than a therapeutic setting. It was a system based on mutual distrust, and treats gender diverse clients like sex offenders. In fact, Blanchard’s program used the same halls, offices, and staff for treating sex offenders. Imagine the dynamic that creates. Following in the footsteps of mentor Kurt Freund, B;anchard even subjects clients to the same sort of testing used on sex offenders (see plethysmograph: a disputed device).
By selecting for these patients and rejecting the rest, Blanchard has been able to advance the claim that being trans is all about sex, rather than gender identity. Blanchard published several articles regarding this theory, which went unnoticed until disgraced anesthesiologist Anne Lawrence latched on to them as a form of validation.
1998 was the year the Clarke Institute lost its federal funding for vaginoplasties, and the year Anne Lawrence wrote the pro-“autogynephilia” essay “Men Trapped in Men’s Bodies.” Blanchard’s sudden irrelevance in the field of gender identity and to indigent patients in Toronto seeking funding for surgery made Anne Lawrence’s interest a natural opportunity for teamwork to advance their mutually beneficial agendas.
Following the publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey, trans people and concerned professionals from around the world decided enough was enough with these people and started a public awareness campaign about Blanchard’s ties to a conservative-run eugenics think tank and behind-the-scenes bullying of dissenting peers. Once peers at HBIGDA expressed their concerns about Bailey to Northwestern University, Blanchard resigned in protest in November 2003.
Blanchard is going to go down in history as the George Rekers of gender diversity. Rekers was one of the most vocal critics of the American Psychiatric Association’s depathologization of homosexuality in 1973.
“Autogynephilia”
“Autogynephilia” is a sex-fueled mental illness made up by Blanchard, who defines it as “a manâs paraphilic tendency to be sexually aroused by the thought or image of himself as a woman.” [2]
This diagnosis appeals to some transgender people, who see the scientific-sounding term as a way to “elevate” themselves in social acceptability rather than compulsive masturbators, sex addicts, or people with a fetish for possessing a piece of female clothing or anatomy.
Look at the definition of âparaphiliaâ put forth in the textbook used by Bailey in his cancelled Sexuality course (LeVay and Valente, Human Sexuality, p. 454). LeVayâs description of paraphilias as âproblematic sexual behaviorâ and “illnesses that need treatment” is a major insight into their entire project. These academic imply that âautogynephiliaâ involves non-consenting adults, that being trans is a form of exhibitionism that requires responses from others. The suggest that coming out to friends and family and asking for public acceptance is a form of sexualized humiliation brought on by the very expression of gender.
Blanchard ideas appeal to a small group of other “autogynephilia” activists and conservative supporters. Most trans people and most mainstream scientists criticize “authogynephilia” as being similar to “nymphomania” and other fake sex diseases created to oppress others.
The Man Who Would Be Queen (2003)
Below is a shill review by Blanchard, posted on Amazon.com defending J. Michael Bailey.
[five stars] Man Who Would Be Queen, April 17, 2003 Reviewer: Ray Blanchard from Toronto
The explosion of rage detonated by the publication of J. Michael Bailey’s book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, has largely obscured an important message of that book: There are two fundamentally different types of male-to-female transsexualism, and they are equally valid. The homosexual type are erotically aroused by other (biological) males, and the autogynephilic type are erotically aroused by the thought or image of themselves as women.
When I joined the Clarke Gender Identity Clinic in 1980, the literalist interpretation of transsexualism as the condition of men-trapped-in-women’s-bodies reigned supreme. Many clinicians dismissed all transsexuals with a history of sexual arousal in association with cross-dressing as “mere transvestites” and summarily excluded them from consideration for sex reassignment surgery. This situation was extremely confusing to many male-to-female transsexuals who desperately wanted to undergo sex reassignment and live their lives as women, but who thought that their past history of masturbation in women’s attire meant that they were “merely” transvestites.
Fortunately for these patients, the policy of “one erection and you’re out” was never followed at the Toronto clinic. Several of the earliest patients approved for sex reassignment had been husbands and fathers in the male role, and they freely reported clear-cut histories of sexual arousal in association with cross-dressing or cross-gender fantasy. It gradually became clear to me that for such patients the erotic value of becoming a woman was the essential motive behind the desire for sex reassignment, and that erection and ejaculation in women’s attire were not simply accidental by-products. I never saw this as an invalid reason for desiring sex reassignment, I never saw these patients as some lesser breed of transsexuals, and I never designated their form of gender dysphoria as “secondary.”
During the years when I was publishing the autogynephilia papers, several autogynephiles wrote me to express their relief at learning that there were many others like themselves, and that their feelings of being transsexual were not a delusion. Those articles were published in specialty journals with limited circulations, and it is remarkable that any autogynephiles encountered them at all. Prof. Bailey’s book, which is written for a general audience in a clear and accessible style, has the potential to bring the same reassurance to a much larger group of people. The audiences for which this book was intended, which include students, clinical professionals, and laypersons, should not mistake the campaign of disinformation (verging at times on hate-mail) currently being waged by an ideologically-driven group of self-appointed “activists” as the universal view of all transsexual and transgender persons.
APA DIV 44
From an August 2003 CAMH newsletter: http://www.camh.net/careers/bt_pdfs/bt_august292003.pdf
Holding the framed citation is Ray Blanchard. Right is James S. Fitzgerald, Ph.D., President of Division 44 of the American Psychological Association.
The CAMH Gender Identity Clinic is delighted to announce that our clinic received a Presidential Citation from Division 44 of the American Psychological Association (the Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues) at a ceremony on August 9, 2003.
The text of the Citation reads as follows:
“The Gender Identity Clinic has established itself as the premier research center on gender dysphoria research and clinical care since 1968, and is celebrating its 35th year.”
Resignation from HBIGDA
On 4 November 2003, Blanchard resigned from HBIGDA in protest of a letter they sent to Northwestern University regarding charges of ethical misconduct leveled at J. Michael Bailey.
November 4, 2003 Walter J. Meyer III, MD President, HBIGDA Bean Robinson, PhD Executive Director, HBIGDA
Dear Drs. Meyer and Robinson:
It is with deep regret that I tender my resignation in the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (HBIGDA). I have long supported the goals of the HBIGDA. I have been involved in the clinical care of transsexual persons for 24 years. During the years 1983 to 1991, I conducted eight research studies on the therapeutic impact of hormonal and surgical treatment of transsexuals, studies that were reported in six refereed journal articles and two book chapters. I published an additional article on the desirability of insurance coverage for sex reassignment surgery as recently as 2000. It is therefore a matter of some sadness that the recent actions of the HBIGDA Executive have made it necessary for me to disassociate myself from this organization.
I am referring to the appalling decision of the HBIGDA Officers and Board of Directors to attempt to intervene in Northwestern University’s investigation into the allegations made by certain members of the transsexual community against Prof. J. Michael Bailey. This decision is documented in the attached letter, which is prominently displayed on a popular transsexual Web site. Such an intervention, undertaken without any effort by the HBIGDA to conduct their own systematic inquiry or to learn all the relevant facts of the matter, could only be prejudicial to Northwestern’s investigation. In fact it has the appearance, whether this is accurate or not, of being a deliberate and improper attempt to bias that investigation. The HBIGDA would have been better advised to allow the Northwestern authorities, who are actually taking the trouble to investigate the allegations, to reach an impartial decision based on all relevant testimony and factual evidence.
I do not know the motives behind the Officers’ and Board of Directors’ actions, but those motives are irrelevant. It is their actions that are unacceptable and that make it impossible for me to continue to belong to the HBIGDA.
Very truly yours, Ray Blanchard
Blanchard and DSM
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association lists three “mental disorders” that can be diagnosed in gender variant people: gender identity disorder, transvestic fetishism, and childhood gender nonconformity.
Blanchard, who happens to be an American citizen, says a DSM listing has different implications in Canada than in the U.S. “This question of whether autogynephilia should be listed as a disorder is strictly an American preoccupation,” he says. “In the U.S. there is no universal health insurance plan, so people will pay for their SRS out of their own pocket. But in most of the Western world, where there is government-run health insurance, in order for their sex reassignment to be paid for, it has to be a disorder, it has to be in the DSM. Health plans don’t pay for surgery that is elective. They pay for surgery that is medically necessary.”
He points out that from 1970 to ’99 the Ontario Health Insurance Plan covered sex-reassignment surgery for patients who’d been approved for it by the Clarke Institute. But the conservative government that came to power in 1999 stopped paying for it. “Now a group of transsexuals have brought a human rights complaint against removal of sex-reassignment surgery as a benefit,” he says. “Their argument is that this is a recognized treatment for a psychiatric disorder. It’s got to remain in the DSM. The DSM has no formal jurisdiction in Canada, but in fact it’s taken as the standard.” [4]
Many are beginning to question whether these diagnoses are really necessary in order to receive health services. Many are even questioning whether these are diseases at all. Because Blanchard and several cronies are heavily involved in the DSM’s language about these “disorders,” it is likely that we will see a pitched battle about this matter when the next DSM revision is made.
In the meantime, Blanchard’s star continues to fade, reduced to eugenicists, old-school sexologists and psychologists, and those self-hating gender variant people who seek a “cure” for their gender variance. The Clarke has been surpassed by several other Toronto facilities offering more flexible and inclusive access to health services. As numbers at those clinics continue to surge, numbers at The Clarke continue to decline, a harbinger of Blanchard’s place in history as an interesting curiosity from the waning years when our community was considered disordered and diseased.
Blanchard on fifth estate
In October 2004, Ray Blanchard and team were featured in a news magazine program on transsexualism, reported by Hana Gartner. Below is a transcript of selected sections:
Gartner voiceover: One of the most established gender clinics in the world is at Torontoâs Center for Addiction and Mental Health. Itâs run by psychologist Ray Blanchard, who has been studying transsexuals for the past 25 years. He says they have a serious illness.
Blanchard: Transsexualism is considered a psychiatric disorder by the World Health Organization and by the American Psychiatric Association. We probably know more about how to treat them or manage them than we do know about what causes them.
Gartner voiceover: Those who come here looking for help must first be diagnosed and assessed by this panel of experts.
Blanchard to experts: They told the GP that they had some gender problem. Itâs a biological female. It looks to me that the patient hasnât been started on a testosterone medication yet.
Gartner voiceover: The only effective treatment for this psychiatric disorder is a combination of hormones and surgery.
Gartner to Blanchard: Can cosmetic surgery cure this disorder?
Blanchard: You are giving someone surgeries that enable them to be accepted as the opposite sex. Cosmetic surgery can help people lead much happier and more productive lives.
Blanchard: Her vocal cords will thicken and her voice will drop into the male range, and that is a permanent change.
Gartner voiceover: Ray Blanchard, who is in charge of Canadaâs top gender clinic, believes very few people should go on hormones or change their sex. His clinic sees only about 50 patients a year, and he rejects most of them.
Blanchard: We are not trying to encourage people to have sex reassignment surgery; on the contrary, we encourage people to try and make an adjustment to their biological gender.
Gartner: A 17 year old female, if she came to see you, what advice would you give her?
Blanchard: At our clinic, the minimum age we would consider a patent for hormonal treatment would be 20 years, and the minimum age for considering them for surgical treatment would be 21 years.
1. Armstrong J. The Body within, the body without. Globe and Mail, 12 June 2004, p. F1. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040612/COVER12/TPComment/TopStories
2. Newbery L. Trans-sexuals happier after operation, MD says. Toronto Star, 27 November 1984, p. H2.
3. Bailey JM. (Chair), Phenomenology and classification of male-to-female transsexualism. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Academy of Sex Research, Paris. June, 2000. Slide 38. http://www.psych.nwu.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/Blanchard’s%20Paris%20Talk.ppt
“The foregoing studies indicate that there are only two fundamentally different types of transsexualism in males: homosexual and nonhomosexual. This finding points to the next question: What do the three nonhomosexual types have in common? I have suggested that the common characteristic is an erotic orientation that I have labeled autogynephilia. Autogynephilia may be defined as a manâs paraphilic tendency to be sexually aroused by the thought or image of himself as a woman.”
4. Rodkin D. Sex and Transsexuals. Chicago Reader December 12, 2003
‘The Man Who Would Be Queen’ Controversy Continues: Professor Blanchard Quits HBIGDA NTAC press release 10 November 2003 http://www.ntac.org/pr/release.asp?did=81
Magnus Hirschfeld and Max Tilke, Die Tranvestiten. Eine Untersuchung ĂŒber den erotischen Verkleidungstrieb mit umfangreichen casuistichem und historischem Material
These are URLs from the original version of this site.
Ray Blanchard motivations for oppressing sex and gender minorities: http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/ray-blanchard-motivations.html
âMale gender dysphorics, paedophiles, and fetishists:” How Ray Blanchard sees us
Clarke Institute Clearinghouse: documenting the words and actions of CAMH staff
Toronto: epicenter of pathologization of sex and gender minorities: http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/ray-blanchard-hypotheses.html
Ray Blanchardâs place in history: http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/ray-blanchard-history.html
Notes, updates, further reading: http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/ray-blanchard-notes.html
Note: In 2025, this site phased out AI illustrations after artist feedback. The previous illustration is here.
John Michael “Mike” Bailey (born 1951) is an American psychologist, considered one of the most unethical sexologists in history. Bailey’s checkered career is a series of ethics scandals and controversies.
Since 2003 this site has documented Bailey’s central role in the academic exploitation of sex and gender minorities. One history book says my work coordinating the community response to anti-trans academics “represented one of the most organized and unified examples of transgender activism seen to date.” In 2021 the United States Library of Congress selected this site for archiving because it is âan important part of this collection and the historical record.â
Bailey’s notable ethical scandals
Children and sex
supporting “many offending pedophiles who are usually punished far more harshly than research suggests is warranted by the harm they cause.”
supporting leniency for a rapist whose victims are infants and young children: “if he didnât physically hurt them, and if they didnât remember traumatically, his actions should be penalized less than had he physically hurt them and they did remember.”
promulgating the concept of “pre-homosexual” children: “pre-homosexual children tend to be relatively gender nonconforming.”
claiming to know the sexual orientation of children
supporting fired sexologist Kenneth Zucker, whose “therapy” of gender diverse children has been widely outlawed and described as “child abuse”
supporting penile plethysmography, a controversial device for measuring genital arousal; some sexologists have attached plethysmographs to the penises of children to measure their erections for “research”
Supporting convicted serial child rapist Jerry Sandusky: “In an exchange with Wright County Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter, Bailey affirmed his belief that Sanduskyâs accusers had lied. ‘You believe the people testifying against Jerry Sandusky are lying?’ Carter asked. Bailey responded, ‘I can see that if you are not familiar with the evidence that I am familiar with, you would be shocked.'”
Eugenics
dissertation advisor and mentor Lee Willerman was a member of the American Eugenics Society
stating it is “morally acceptable” to screen for and abort gay fetuses: âselection for heterosexuality may benefit parents and children and is unlikely to cause significant harm.â
arguing that “offering sex offenders the opportunity to be castrated in return for a reduced sentence is not ethically problematic coercion.”
Signing a 2018 letter from hate group American College of Pediatricians to the Trump Administration. Bailey demanded “upholding the scientific definition of sex in law and policy,” adding “an individual who identifies as transgender remains either a biological male or female.”
Note: In 2025, this site phased out AI illustrations after artist feedback. The previous illustration is here.
Sasha Ayad is a conservative American psychologist and a key figure in anti-transgender extremism. Ayad and collaborator Stella O’Malley are world leaders in the gender critical movement attacking transgender people, especially children.
Do not under any circumstances go to Ayad for any counseling of any kind. If you are a minor forced to see Ayad, do everything in your power to end the sessions and find a supportive local therapist instead.
Background
Sasha Ayad was born February 1, 1982 and attended University of Houston, earning bachelor’s and master’s degrees in psychology.
Anti-trans activism
Ayad is connected to a number of anti-trans organizations, most of which are just part of a web farm with reciprocal links to make Ayadâs allies and their fringe ideologies seem more numerous and influential than they are.
Note: In 2025, this site phased out AI illustrations after artist feedback. The previous illustration is here.
Satoshi Kanazawa (born 1962) is an American-born British evolutionary psychologist. He considers fellow evolutionary psychologist J. Michael Bailey “one of the greatest behavior geneticists and sex researchers in the world today.”
Logrolling with J. Michael Bailey
Kanazawa wrote a Psychology Today blog called The Scientific Fundamentalist until his dismissal in 2011 for his claim about race and attractiveness.
Kanazawa’s 2016 research on female sexuality cites several works by Bailey.
To return the favor, Bailey convinced two psychology department colleagues to co-sign Bailey’s request to host Kanazawa as a visiting scholar at Northwestern University in 2018.
When students and faculty objected, Bailey said he âdidnât invite him, in the usual sense of that word.â He claimed Kanazawa was just asking for âa desk and library access.â
Northwestern’s Psychology Department once again rallied around Bailey and his two colleagues, refusing to intervene or comment on the matter.
Kanazawa S (2016). Possible evolutionary origins of human female sexual fluidity. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2017 Aug;92(3):1251-1274. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12278. Epub 2016 May 16.
As a social psychologist (PH), a consultant counselling psychologist (PL) a social psychologist (MB) ) and a chartered counselling psychologist (LM), we are challenged and heartened by Joan Roughgarden’s call for psychologists to condemn transphobic and otherwise bigoted research. Like Roughgarden we were troubled upon reading Bailey’s book for its explicit transphobic assumptions that trans adults are a negative outcome of development and for the heterosexism, sexism and racism which Roughgarden describes so well. Trans men, gay and bisexual women are notable by their invisibility in the text. The use of the authors friends’ opinion of bisexuality as “gay, straight or lying” in the book itself, and now it seems in advertisements is not perceived as amusing or trivial in our opinion in view of the slow progress there has been in developing a bisexual psychology, and the real effects of biphobia in blighting people’s lives. There is very little recognition in mainstream psychology generally which is further perpetuated by this book, that someone could be attracted to both sexes or have relationships with both, with many theorists favouring the general binary construction of sexuality which does not allow for an ‘in between’ position; people are either gay or straight (Ochs, 1996). Generally, many bisexuals are seen as straight if in a relationship with someone of the opposite sex, and gay if in a relationship with someone of the same sex and that experience of having an imposed social identity which conflicts with a personal identity, and the confusion it engenders can have commonalities with trans experience. In respect to the “Gaydar” and discussion of sexual orientation and related behaviour described in the book, a whole literature of gay and lesbian psychology which has been painstakingly developed and promoted within mainstream psychology, appears to have been excluded.
We are particularly concerned that Bailey’s work will be seen as representative of scientific psychological research, both by the trans community and by other sections of the public. Bailey relies on a sample size of six – which would not be sufficient for any experimental or survey research to be published in a peer reviewed psychology journal. (Indeed, the standard statistical assumptions upon which quantitative psychological research rests – such as the central limit theorem – cannot apply to samples of this size). In this regard Bailey’s work is an outlier rather than the norm for quantitative psychology.
Sometimes psychologists do conduct research with small sample sizes, and rely on qualitative data rather than quantitative data. Such research can be particularly useful when conducted among under-represented and difficult-to-access populations as it can inform psychologists about a group that it might be difficult to study statistically. Does Bailey’s research then fit the model for acceptable qualitative psychology? This is questionable. A hallmark of good qualitative research is reflexivity – an awareness and description of the way that qualitative data is shaped by the researcher’s own position. Qualitative researchers also frequently understand their participants as directing the research and informing its questions. The participants in this research have provided the case material but cannot be said to be participants in the sense that is currently considered good practice in psychological research. There is insufficient discussion of the limitations of his interviews and too many conclusions are drawn about the essence of transsexual psychology from casual talk in bars, occasional anecdotes and the opinions of the author’s friends. The persistent critiques from the trans community (including Bailey’s own participants) support our criticism of this not being collaborative qualitative research.In spite of the differences between them, and the debates between quantitative and qualitative methods in particular, all social scientific methodologies are designed to ensure that we do not inflate our own opinions into evidence. In quantitative research this is done by using methods that limit the effects of the researchers’ own perspective on the data. In qualitative research, it is done by making those effects part of the data itself. This is not in evidence in the research reported in “The Man Who Would Be Queen”.
As a result the danger that Bailey’s expressed anti-trans opinions might be confused with scientific evidence is particularly high in this case. Indeed, Bailey repeatedly uses a non-scientific form of argument, the ‘ad hominum’, to lend scientific credence to his point of view. He often cites his own status within scientific communities (and those of colleagues) but it is important to note that status within one’s own field, (or elsewhere), should count for nothing in academic debates. For these reasons, the consistent criticism of Bailey’s work from trans scholars, scientists from other disciplines and activists such as Joan Roughgarden, Jed Bland and Lynn Conway is particularly welcome to us as psychologists who are concerned with standards of ethical and scholarly conduct within our field. Roughgarden is right that there is a history of transphobic research in psychology. In fact we are surprised that she describes Bailey’s research as ‘surprising’ as he has been involved in research on childhood ‘gender non-conformity’ for some time (e.g., Bailey & Zucker, 1996). Most of the psychological research on transsexuality and transgender falls into the abnormal clinical literature, as did most research on homosexuality up until the 1970s. Indeed, in contrast to the well-developed fields of research on heterosexism (and also sexism, ageism, and racism) there are few studies of transphobia in psychology journals, and no standardized attitude measure has been published. Clearly there is a wide open field of trans psychology, premised on the assumption that trans people are people rather than clinical cases, which is crying out to be developed. However, it would be wrong to assume that the methods of psychology are so completely flawed that they render Bailey’s research as paradigmatic.
As psychologists with a special interest in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender psychology and civil rights, we accept the need to change the way psychology has constructed all of these populations and to draw from recent works within the field of psychology to expand our everyday reality about our social worlds. However, we also recognise the need to become more interdisciplinary and even multidisciplinary if we really do want to move lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (and dare we say ‘queer’) studies into the 21st Century. There are growing numbers of critical psychologists challenging traditional psychological theories and shifting paradigms. This is particularly evident in the Lesbian and Gay Psychology Section of the British Psychological Society which promotes and develops lesbian, gay and bisexual psychological research and practice not framed from within a heterosexist framework, as well as including a significant number of psychologists with a special interest in developing a transgender psychology which does not pathologise trans people . This will inevitably take time and patience – despite the need for those impatient enough to want change, to come forward and become more visible.
Suggestions for future considerations for transgender psychology research both for participants to raise prior to being involved in research and for psychologists to address when designing and seeking ethical approval for such research:
1. The employment of standard ethical and scientific procedures.
2. Wide consultation with trans people and trans activists about hypotheses, research questions, etc, and a commitment to applying current good practice more commonplace now in regard to user involvement in more mainstream fields of research to trans research, particularly when the principal researchers come from outside the trans community
3. Not to use trans people as ‘natural experiments’ to test hypotheses about ‘gender’ , ‘sexual orientation’ etc. in static categorical terms.
4. Inclusion of qualitative and quantitative data.
5. Development of prejudice research.
6. Recognition that there is an interface with other minority areas (e.g., psychology of women, lesbian, gay and bisexual psychology) but not a tokenistic addition of trans issues to these areas without substantial engagement.
7. Sensitivity to the ways that research on prejudiced groups will be received and to reflect that awareness in how the research is disseminated.
National Convener Mr Gordon Walker Department of Psychology, Monash University PO Box 197, Caulfied East, VIC, 3145 Tel: (03) 9903 2728 Fax: (03) 9903 2501 Email: [email protected]
GLIP News Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology An Interest Group of the Australian Psychological Society Ltd. Volume 2, Issue 2 August 2003 page 5
by Gordon Walker, Convener
Book review: Bailey, J.M. (2003). The man who would be queen: The science of gender-bending and transsexualism. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
This is a book, written by a leading researcher in the field, is about understanding sexual orientation and identity. Although the author makes much use of research, this is not a textbook; any educated person with an interest in this topic would find the material very accessible. The stories of various boys and men are woven together with the discussion of research to create a highly interesting and very worthwhile book. In fact once I started I had difficulty putting down! Broadly speaking it is an examination of the relationship between male homosexuality and femininity. As the author says, to say that femininity and homosexuality are closely bound together has been politically incorrect for some time now, but nevertheless factually correct. The book then goes on to demonstrate this across the sexual orientation spectrum.
The book is therefore a challenge to the postmodern position on gender, although the author clearly occupies the middle ground between social constructionism and essentialism. This is demonstrated in his discussion of feminine boys and of those labeled gender identity disordered (GID) in particular. In looking at the debate between those on the left who want them left alone to be as feminine as they want to be and those on the extreme right who view homosexuality as arrested psychosexual development, he draws the readerâs attention to research that shows that therapy directed at reducing femininity in highly feminine boys reduces the number who ultimately seek a sex-change, and therefore increases the number who as adults identify as gay. He suggests that an alternative to this would be to allow such boys to become women very early (pre-puberty) so that they can have better outcomes as women.
The author uses a range of research to clearly challenge the view that pronounced femininity in boys is the result of socialisation. The question of where does extreme femininity come from is also examined
Similarities and differences between gay and straight men are also examined. Broadly speaking, although gay men have interests more in line with those of women, in attitudes to sex and the body homosexual and heterosexual men were shown to be essentially the same; the differences in behaviour come about because heterosexually men are basically constrained in their behaviour by women. The author provides a very accessible and readable account of the sometimes confusing array of studies that have attempted to account for sexual orientation and draws the conclusion that there is some fundamental biological influence that transcends culture. The last section of the book focuses on transsexualism, and produces a compelling argument for recognising two main types: homosexual and non-homosexual types, with the latter being erotically obsessed with the image of themselves as women. A very much more complex picture emerges than the popular image of a woman being trapped inside a manâs body.
The great value of this book lies in the way it has brought together a wide range of research on important questions relating to sexual orientation. This gives the reader a wonderful opportunity to reflect further on what being other than heterosexual might mean.
Gordon Walker Department of Psychology School of Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychological Medicine Monash University
Letter to Dr. Walker from WOMAN Network
âWe write to express our concern that the Special Interest Group on Gay and Lesbian Issues of the Australian Psychological Society has been implicated in support for the writings of Prof J Michael Bailey of Northwestern University.
In this respect, we draw your attention to the following quote from GLIP News, August 2003:
ââŠany educated person with an interest in this topic would find the material very accessible. The stories of various boys and men are woven together with the discussion of research to create a highly interesting and very worthwhile book. In fact once I started I had difficulty putting down! ⊠The author provides a very accessible and readable account of the sometimes confusing array of studies that have attempted to account for sexual orientation and draws the conclusion that there is some fundamental biological influence that transcends culture. ⊠The great value of this book lies in the way it has brought together a wide range of research on important questions relating to sexual orientation. This gives the reader a wonderful opportunity to reflect further on what being other than heterosexual might mean.â
The book referred to is âThe Man Who Would Be Queenâ which was published under the imprimateur of the National Academies of Sciences. It has brought huge condemnation for its inaccurate and highly offensive portrayal of transsexualism and the people who are affected by it. This has culminated recently in legal action against the author, who is accused of failing to obtain the necessary informed consents of the subjects of his material. Importantly, the scientific veracity of the work has now been shattered in a most public way at the recent IASR Conference in the United States.
Bailey seized on earlier work by Ken Zucker of the somewhat infamous Clarke Institute, and categorised us as either excessively homosexual males or autogynaephilic males. He deliberately excluded the anecdotal evidence of those, the vast majority, who did not fit with his theory and ignored completely the prevailing hard science pointing to the somatic nature of transsexualism. The fall out from this scientific fraud is gaining momentum and it would be very unfortunate if Monash University were to be included in this.
You can gauge the international responses to the issue by visiting these websites:
One matter of very real concern is the way in which the religious right has already seized on Baileyâs writings to further justify their rejection of transsexualism as a valid condition of human sexual formation and their condemnation of those affected by it. These same condemnations will undoubtedly be directed at gay and lesbian people to the detriment of us all.
We therefore ask you to consider repudiating Baileyâs work and ensure your next newsletter contains a suitable disclaimer.â
It is reported that Dr. Walker is making inquiries about the matter and will respond after heâs had time to review the matter.
The CAMH Gender Identity Clinic is delighted to announce that our clinic received a Presidential Citation from Division 44 of the American Psychological Association (the Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues) at a ceremony on August 9, 2003.
The text of the Citation reads as follows:
The Gender Identity Clinic has established itself as the premier research center on gender dysphoria research and clinical care since 1968, and is celebrating its 35th year.”
APA DIV 44 also allowed James Cantor to write a glowing review of The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey. Joseph Henry Press was later forced to attribute the review to Cantor by name, rather than their earlier attempts to imply that the review was the consensus of APA DIV 44.
James Neal Butcher (born November 20, 1933) is an American psychologist who has published pathologizing materials about sex and gender minorities. His college textbook Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life was influenced by the toxic ideology of Ray Blanchard, who promotes disease models of gender identity and expression.
Background
Butcher was born in Bergoo, West Virginia. His father was killed in a coal mining accident when Butcher was 8. His mother and five children moved to Charleston, where she died when Butcher was 11. Butcher then took a job selling newspapers, and he and three minor siblings raised themselves without an adult in the home.
In 1950, Butcher enlisted in the Army, serving in Korea. After his discharge, he earned a BA in psychology from Guilford College in 1960. In 1964 he earned a PhD in clinical psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He then served as a professor of psychology and as Director of the Clinical Psychology Program at the University of Minnesota, where he was appointed Professor Emeritus after 40 years. He is best known for his work on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and has published fifty-eight books and more than two hundred fifty articles in personality assessment, abnormal psychology, and crisis-intervention.
Several academic journals that are ostensibly “peer reviewed” are getting “peer-packed” with sympathetic ideologues and old-style cronyism. These include Archives of Sexual Behavior and Behavior Genetics.
These connections have been coming out as part of our investigation into J. Michael Bailey and the systemic problems that allowed his book The Man Who Would Be Queen to be published as “science.”
Sheri Berenbaum
Bailey’s colleague and co-author is one of the editors. Now at Penn State, did her post-doc at Minnesota before going to Southern Illinois.
Lisabeth DiLalla
Southern Illinois (where Bernbaum was a few years ago)
David A Blizzard (Penn State)
Gerald McClearn (Penn State)
Robert Plomin (formerly from Penn State)
Matt McGue
Thomas Bouchard
Mentor to Berenbaum and McGue, who has been slammed for his unethical work with twins at Minnesota, notably the “Jim Twins”.
John Loehlin
Bailey’s Ph.D. mentor. On the editorial board. Co-authored many articles with Lee Willerman.
