Lalumiere has joined the International Academy of Sex Research and the editorial board at the journal controlled by Clarke Institute personnel, The Archives of Sexual Behavior.
Martin Lalumiere, B.Sc., M.Ps., Ph.D. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Unit 3 Toronto, Ontario, M6J 1H4 Tel: (416) 535-8501, 2669 Fax: (416) 583-4327 Email to:[email protected]
LalumiĂšre, M. L., Blanchard, R., & Zucker, K. J. (2000). Sexual orientation and handedness in men and women: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 575-592. LalumiĂšre, M.L., Chalmers, L., Quinsey, V.L., & Seto, M.C. (1996) A test of the mate deprivation hypothesis of sexual coercion. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 299-318. LalumiĂšre, M.L., Harris, G.T., Quinsey, V.L., & Rice, M.E. (1998) Sexual deviance and number of older brothers among sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse, 10, 5-15. LalumiĂšre, M. L., Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (2001). Psychopathy and developmental instability. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 75-92. LalumiĂšre, M.L., & Quinsey, V.L. (1994). The discriminability of rapists from non-sex offenders using phallometric measures: A meta-anaylsis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21, 150-175. LalumiĂšre, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (1999). A Darwinian interpretation of individual differences in male propensity for sexual aggression. Jurimetrics, 39, 201-216. Quinsey, V. L., & LalumiĂšre, M. L. (2001). Assessment of sex offenders against children (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Seto, M. C., LalumiĂšre, M. L., & Blanchard, R. (2000). The discriminative validity of a phallometric test for pedophilic interests among adolescent offenders against children. Psychological Assessment, 12, 319-327. Seto, M. C., LalumiĂšre, M. L., & Kuban, M. (1999). The sexual preferences of incest offenders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 267-272.
Lisa Diamond is an associate professor of psychology and gender identity at the University of Utah. She was quoted by the Washington Blade on 8 July 2005 praising a study by Gerulf Rieger which claimed male bisexuality does not exist.
âResearch on sexual orientation has been based almost entirely on self-reports, and this is one of the few good studies using physiological measures.â
Rieger is a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology at Northwestern University. He is being groomed by his mentor J. Michael Bailey to engage in “science by press conference,” a way of getting publicity and attention through carefully timed media manipulation.
Dr. Diamond was not involved in the study, which involved the use of plethysmograph quackery.
Benedict Carey. Straight, Gay or Lying? Bisexuality Revisited. New York Times, July 5, 2005.
Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science
J. MICHAEL BAILEY (NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY), PAUL L. VASEY (UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE), LISA M. DIAMOND (UNIVERSITY OF UTAH), S. MARC BREEDLOVE (MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY), ERIC VILAIN (UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES), AND MARC EPPRECHT (QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY)
Psychological Science in the Public Interest (Volume 17, Number 2)
The Man Who Would Be Queen is a notoriously anti-transgender book by J. Michael Bailey.
In March 2003, Northwestern University psychologist J. Michael Bailey published The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism.
The Man Who Would Be Queen was crafted and marketed in ways influenced by academic racists and others in the neo-eugenics movement. Bailey uses scientific-sounding arguments to claim sexual minorities and people who display gender diversity are “evolutionary mistakes,” and he claims those who disagree with his ideas are liars.
Normally, a book this scientifically unsound and tainted with charges of academic misconduct, practicing without a license, fabricating data, and sex with a research subject would not even be dignified with a response by many involved, but The Man Who Would Be Queen somehow got published through the Joseph Henry Press, an imprint of the National Academies Press which specializes in science books for popular audiences.
Published commentaries on Bailey
A selection of comments from people concerned about this book and its message
J. Michael Bailey was Chair of the Psychology Department at Northwestern University until 2004. He stepped down in the wake of an investigation into charges of ethics violations surrounding his 2003 book The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Many see this book as the most defamatory book written about gender variance since Janice Raymond wrote The Transsexual Empire in 1979.
Below are some published peer reviews and commentaries about the quality of his “science.”
Selected published commentaries and coverage
âąÂ LINK: Kinder, gentler homophobia (by David Ehrenstein, The Advocate) http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid29121.asp
âąÂ LINK: Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality (by Walter O. Bockting, Journal of Sex Research) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Bockting/Bockting%20Review.html and commentary by Christine Burns http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Bockting/Burns%20commentary.html
âąÂ LINK: Ethical minefields: The sex that would be science (by Julie M. Klein, Seed Magazine) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Ethics/Ethical%20Minefields%20-%20Seed%20Magazine.html
âąÂ LINK: Queer Science: An ‘elite’ cadre of scientists and journalists tries to turn back the clock on sex, gender and race http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=96 (01-01-2004) LINK:(by Heidi Beirich and Bob Moser, Southern Poverty Law Center)
âąÂ LINK: Book review (by Pauline Park, Ph.D. Gay Today) http://gaytoday.com/reviews/061603re.asp
âąÂ LINK: Bailey on gay femininity (by Paul Varnell, Chicago Free Press) http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/varnell/varnell109.html
âąÂ LINK: Why are you a queen? (by Paul Varnell, Washington Blade) http://www.washingtonblade.com/2003/10-17/view/columns/queen.cfm
âąÂ LINK: Weird science (by Kim McNabb, Chicago Free Press) http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/mcnabb/mcnabb1.html
âąÂ LINK: Author is ripped for transsexual research (by Robert Becker, Chicago Tribune) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/ChicagoTribune-7-29-03.html
âąÂ LINK: Dr. Sex (by Robin Wilson, Chronicle of Higher Education) http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i41/41a00801.htm
âąÂ LINK: New gene theory rests on bad science (by Vernon Rosario, Gay & Lesbian Review) http://calbears.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3491/is_200311/ai_n8283071
âąÂ LINK: Trans activists file charges against NU professor (by Gary Barlow, Chicago Free Press) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Chicago%20Free%20Press%20-%20Trans%20Activists%20File%20Charges.htm
âąÂ LINK: NU panel to investigate prof’s research tactics (by Sheila Burt and Laurel Jorgensen , Daily Northwestern) http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2003/11/18/Campus/Nu.Panel.To.Investigate.Profs.Research.Tactics-1912932.shtml
âąÂ LINK: Bailey accused of having sex with research subject (by Sheila Burt, Daily Northwestern) http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2004/01/06/UndefinedSection/Bailey.Accused.Of.Having.Sex.With.Research.Subject-1913112.shtml
âąÂ LINK: University examining Bailey’s sex research (by Katie Walton, Daily Northwestern) http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2004/02/09/Campus/University.Examining.Baileys.Sex.Research-1913654.shtml
âąÂ LINK: University investigates ethics of sex researcher (by Robert Stacy McCain, Washington Times) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Washington%20Times%2011-25-03.html
âąÂ LINK: NIH director defends funds for criticized sex research (by Robert Stacy McCain, Washington Times) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Washington%20Times%201-30-04.html
âąÂ LINK: Northwestern U. psychologist is accused of having sex with research subject (by Robin Wilson, Chronicle of Higher Education) http://chronicle.com/weekly/v50/i17/17a01702.htm
âąÂ LINK: NU professor faces sexual allegations (by Gary Barlow, Chicago Free Press) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Chicago%20Free%20Press%2012-17-03.html
âąÂ Letters re: Dr. Sex (in Chronicle of Higher Education) /info/dr-sex.html
âąÂ LINK: Dr. Sex (by Kate Gambreno, Newcity Chicago) http://www.newcitychicago.com/chicago/2392.html
âąÂ LINK: Book review (by Geoff Parkes) http://web.archive.org/web/20031024053250/http://www.adequacy.net/features/book/book160.shtml
âąÂ LINK: Book review (by Deirdre McCloskey, Reason) http://www.reason.com/0311/cr.dm.queer.shtml
âąÂ Een Mann gevangen in een mannenlichaam (by Peter Vermey, NRC, excerpts translated by Arianne ven der Ven) /info/louis-gooren.html
âąÂ LINK: Sex and Transsexuals (by Dennis Rodkin, Chicago Reader) https://securesite.chireader.com/cgi-bin/Archive/abridged2.bat?path=2003/031212/TRANS&search=transsexual
âąÂ LINK: Transsexual Travesty (by Deirdre McCloskey, Chicago Reader) https://securesite.chireader.com/cgi-bin/Archive/abridged2.bat?path=2003/031219/LETTERS/MCCLOSK&search=transsexual
âąÂ LINK: The man who would write about queens (Transgender Tapestry) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/IFGE-Reviews.html
âąÂ LINK: Tapestry review: The Man Who Would be Queen (by Christine Beatty, Transgender Tapestry) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/IFGE-Reviews.html
âąÂ LINK: Not a man, not the queen (by Gwen Smith, Bay Area Reporter) http://www.gwensmith.com/writing/transmissions67.html
âąÂ LINK: Book review of The Man Who Would Be Queen (by Liza Mundy, Washington Post) http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A61894-2003Mar20¬Found=true
âąÂ Lost in the Male (by John Derbyshire, National Review) https://www.transgendermap.com/?page_id=18388
âąÂ LINK: Book review of The Man Who Would Be Queen (by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D, NARTH) http://www.narth.com/docs/queen.html
âąÂ Transsexuals and the Law (by Dan Seligman, Forbes) /info/dan-seligman.html
âąÂ LINK: Autogynephilia: A Mistaken Model (by Beth Orens) http://www.starways.net/beth/ag.html
âąÂ LINK: To call a woman a queen (by Alison Campbell, Diverse City) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/DiverseCity/DiverseCity.html
âąÂ LINK: 2 Transsexual Women Say Professor Didn’t Tell Them They Were Research Subjects (by Robin Wilson, Chronicle) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Chronicle-7-17-03.html
âąÂ Transsexuals protest (by Jon Marcus, Times Higher Education Supplement) /info/bailey-protest.html
âąÂ LINK: Diagnosis as libel: A letter of warning to Bailey (by Deirdre McCloskey, U. of Illinois at Chicago) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Reader/Deirdre%20McCloskey%20puts%20Bailey%20on%20notice.html
Community response /info/bailey-commentary.html
The trans community has mobilized around this matter, with a wide variety of letters, published commentaries, petitions, etc.
Primary resources include an Investigation by Professor Lynn Conway http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html
and the Clearinghouse on this site. /info/bailey-blanchard-lawrence.html\
This page has selective commentary from the trans community on J. Michael Bailey’s book on gender variance.
J. Michael Bailey is Chair of the Psychology Department at Northwestern University. In March 2003, he published a book called The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Many see this book as the most defamatory book written about gender variance since Janice Raymond wrote The Transsexual Empire in 1979.
âąÂ (05-02-2003) LINK: Critique of The Man Who Would Be Queen (by Jed Bland) http://www.gender.org.uk/chstnuts/queen0.htm
âąÂ (08-18-2003) LINK: The Aforementioned Ugly (by S. Bear Bergman) http://www.butchdykeboy.com/bdb/bear.a1
âąÂ (06-27-2003) LINK: Essay from a young transitioner (by Nell) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Nell%27sEssayOnBBL.html
âąÂ (08-17-2003) Letter from Europe (by Karla) /info/karla.html
âąÂ (05-04-2003) LINK: Bailey’s “poster child for autogynephilia” in her own words (by “Cher” aka Anjelica Kieltyka) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Anjelica.html
âąÂ (06-06-2003) Slavery through essentialism (by Tati do Ceu) /info/bailey-slavery.html
âąÂ (06-09-2003) A Youth TS Perspective (by Bonnie Jackson) /info/bailey-autogynephile.html
âąÂ (06-09-2003) Why Bailey’s book is offensive (by Kelly Novak, M.S.) /info/bailey-transgender.html
âąÂ (06-11-2003) Direct effect: how Bailey personally made my life harder (by women he’s hurt) /info/bailey-defamation.html
âąÂ (06-12-2003) LINK: The Man Who Wouldnât Leave Us Alone (by Ryka) http://www.geocities.com/rykaryka/Baileyrant.html
âąÂ (05-02-2003) Northwestern U. Psychologist J. M. Bailey Debases Social Science In Quest For Celebrity (by Sonia John). /info/bailey-psychology.html
âąÂ (04-27-2003) LINK: The National Academy meets the National Enquirer (by Rebecca Allison, M.D.) http://www.drbecky.com/blog05.html#apr13
âąÂ (06-17-2003) Bailey on institutional reading lists (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-university.html
âąÂ (06-16-2003) My correspondence with Northwestern Student Affairs (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-psychologist.html
âąÂ (06-23-2003) LINK: Open letter to Northwestern Administration (by Lynn Conway) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/NorthwesternLetter1.html
âąÂ (06-18-2003) LINK: Transphobia for Dummies (by Lynn Conway) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BooksForDummies.html
âąÂ (06-19-2003) Bailey’s sexism and analogies of race (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-racism.html
âąÂ (06-20-2003) Mike Bailey and “homosexual transsexuals” (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-homosexual.html
âąÂ (06-21-2003) A note regarding Bailey’s children (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-children.html
âąÂ (06-18-2003) LINK: Transphobia for Dummies (by Lynn Conway) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BooksForDummies.html
âąÂ (06-26-2003) The Man Who Would Be A Scientist (by Gwyneth Rhian Morgan) /info/bailey-scientist.html
âąÂ (06-25-2003) LINK: Review (by Lisa Lees) http://www.lisalees.com/trans/reviews/bailey.html
âąÂ (06-21-2003) LINK: The Bailey Controversy, Trans Activism, and Prudery (by Harper Jean) http://www.livejournal.com/users/garconfille/122906.html
âąÂ (03-09-2004) LINK: Investigative report (by Professor Lynn Conway) http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html
âąÂ (08-06-2003) John Money vs. J. Michael Bailey (intro by Andrea James) /info/bailey-john-money.html
âąÂ (04-19-2003) Divided we fall: the dangers of categorizing transsexual women (by Evelyn, intro by Andrea James) /info/divided.html
âąÂ (05-17-2003) LINK: Excerpts from other community responses (by Rebecca Allison, M.D.) http://www.drbecky.com/blog06.html
âąÂ (07-17-2003) LINK: Identity rape: psych exposed women without their consent (via PsychWatch) http://psychwatch.blogspot.com/2003_07_13_psychwatch_archive.html#105845090093478495
âąÂ (08-07-2003) Biology is destiny: new book drawing fire (via GenderPAC) /info/bailey-genderpac.html
âąÂ (09-13-2003) HBIGDA President blasts Bailey book (courtesy Eli Coleman) /info/eli-coleman.html
âąÂ (09-30-2003) LINK: Book review (via Logged Off) http://home.iprimus.com.au/laurapalmer/manwhowouldbequeen.htm
âąÂ (08-17-2003) Gordon Walker review (via GLIP Newsletter) /info/gordon-walker.html
âąÂ (06-30-2003) LINK: Book review (via GID.info) http://www.angelfire.com/psy/gid/bailey.htm
âąÂ (07-01-2003) LINK: Book review (by Christine Beatty) http://www.glamazon.net/bailey.html
âąÂ (05-14-2003) Overview of Bailey’s methodology and bias (by Andrea James) /info/bailey-transgendered.html
âąÂ (05-14-2003) LINK: It’s a guy thing (by Julie Marie) http://www.geocities.com/juliemarielee2001/blog2004-04.htm#anchor20040410
Transkids.us is a site with some controversial opinions from authors who identify as “homosexual transsexual.” This site suggests that any young person dealing with these feelings who is not exclusively attracted to males is not a “transkid.” The fact that they strongly endorse the views of J. Michael Bailey is also a cause for concern.
Commentaries on this collection of materials
âąÂ (05-14-2003) Anne Lawrence’s responses to critics /info/lawrence-autogynephilia.html
âąÂ (05-28-2003) LINK: Book Launches Controversy Among Transsexual Women (by Debra Hyde) http://www.yesportal.com/news.cfm/1341 http://www.pursedlips.com/
âąÂ (05-18-2003) LINK: …and the Cat Fight Gets Even Nastier (by Jamie Faye Fenton) http://members.tgforum.com/jamie/blog/2003_07_01_archive.html
âąÂ (06-16-2003) Kathleen Becker on “autogynephilia” /info/kathleen-becker.html
âąÂ (05-18-2003) Kendra Blewitt on “autogynephilia” /info/kendra-letter.html
âąÂ (05-06-2003) Willow Arune on “autogynephilia” and exchange with Dana Beyer, M.D. /info/dana-beyer-willow-arune.html /info/bailey-willow-arune.html
âąÂ (01-19-2004) Jamie Faye Fenton on “autogynephilia” /info/jamie-faye-fenton.html
âąÂ (05-15-2003) Selected letters and excerpts from readers /info/selected-letters.html
The “brain sex” concept put forth by Moir and Jessel is far more troubling to me than the Bem Sex Role Inventory.
Description: The purpose of the Moir-Jessel Brain Sex Test is “to determine whether your brain functions within the normal range for a male or a female.” This test gives two scores of which the participant selects the correct one for their sex. The interpretation of these scores, breaks the male and female scores each into three categories.
Males scoring less than 0 are “Extremely Masculine.”
Males scoring between 0 and 60 are “Normal Males.”
Males scoring greater than 60 are “Feminine Males.”
Females scoring less than 50 are “Masculine Female.”
Females scoring between 50 to 100 is “Normal Female.”
Females scoring greater than 100 is “Extremely Feminine.”
Anne Lawrence states: “The book BRAIN SEX, from which the test is derived, is a sloppy piece of pop science, full of oversimplifications, unsupported inferences, and speculations presented as though they were facts.” She adds, “The test has not been validated by actual samples of male and female subjects… [T]he test has never been validated with a sample of transsexuals, either.”
I agree about the lack of scientific validity in this extremely controversial book. I would also add that science can be used, or misused, for social purposes. Valid observations can be used to draw absurd conclusions, like the concept of “social Darwinism” put forth by racists and proponents of eugenics.
Moir and Jessel’s Brain Sex is to sexism what Murray and Herrnstein’s The Bell Curve is to racism: a veneer of scientific methodology laid over an agenda that is sexist at its very core. I find the fact that this book is warmly embraced by many transgender women to be a highly troubling commentary on our community’s attitude toward gender stereotypes.
To argue that social inequalities between the sexes is based on brain structure is simply misogyny draped in a labcoat.
The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) is a gender test that was developed by Sandra Lipsitz Bem (1944â2014), who began researching sex roles since the early 1970s. The Bem test indicates the degrees of absorption of cultural definitions of gender, as reflected in the user’s personality.
Overview
Cynthia Connor and colleagues summarize Bem’s findings in an interesting article titled “Intrinsic Motivation and Role Adaptability with Regards to Drama Students:”
The possession of both masculine and feminine characteristics has important consequences for behavior (Bem, S. L., 1974). An expanded behavioral repertoire gives androgynous individuals superior sex-role adaptability in comparison to sex-typed individuals. The androgynous individual is able to adapt to a variety of situations. Sex-typed people internalize societies sex-appropriate behaviors as being desirable and exclude cross-sexed behaviors from their behavioral repertoires. Sandra Bemâs pioneering research on the dimensions of masculinity and femininity led to the development of the Bem Sex Role Inventory, (1974). The Bem Sex Role Inventory measures masculinity and femininity as two discriminable dimensions. The androgynous individual scores high on both dimensions. Sex-typed individuals score high on one dimension and reject while rejecting the characteristics of the other dimension. Androgynous people enact their masculine and feminine on different occasions (Vonk, R. & Ashemore, R. D., 1993). In describing their masculine, feminine and gender neutral attributes sides, Androgynous subjects use more situational qualifiers to explain their behavior. This supports Sandra Bemâs theory that androgyny is manifested as situational flexibility (1975).
After continued research into androgyny, Bem developed a cognitive schema theory of sex role behavior (Cook, E. P. 1985). Androgyny is a particular way of processing information. Androgynous individuals do not use sex-role related schemas to guide their information processing. Gender schematic individuals divide the world into masculine and feminine. They use traditional sex-role standards in their processing of information. Gender schema theory does not emphasize the degree to which an individual is masculine or feminine, but rather the extent to which they process new information along in terms of sex roles (Hargreaves, D. J. & Colley, A. M., 1987).
This inventory (BSRI) provides independent assessments of masculinity and femininity in terms of the respondent’s self-reported possession of socially desirable, stereotypically masculine and feminine personality characteristics. This can also be seen as a measurement of the extent to which respondents spontaneously sort self-relevant information into distinct masculine and feminine categories. The self administering 60-item questionnaire measures masculinity, femininity, androgyny, and undifferentiated, using the Masculinity and Femininity scales.
Criticisms
While Bem’s theories are very interesting, the test itself for use in our community is problematic for several reasons:
Reliance on gender stereotypes which can be recognized as male or female by the test taker.
Self-reporting by the test taker based on the above can influence the outcome.
While Bem asserts that androgynous takers will score high on both scales, this may not be true for trans people. Many people in our community are gender schematic, or very invested in culturally defined sex-appropriate behaviors, and a baseline has not been established for us.
References
Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Counseling & Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Bem Sex – Role Inventory. Bem, Sandra L. USA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1981.
The COGIATI is an online “gender test.” COGIATI stands for Combined Gender Identity And Transsexuality Inventory. It sounds like it is a science test (even though it is not). It was made to tell if someone is a transgender woman, but it can not tell you that.
I like and respect Jennifer Diane Reitz. Jennifer created the COGIATI as part of a series Transsexual Tests. She has helped many people. However, I disagree strongly and respectfully with Jennifer on the COGIATI test. I do not think it will help people. These kinds of tests are not scientific. They do not have scientific validity.
The COGIATI has questions that Jennifer says are based on sex differentiation. The scores are:
-650 to -390: Class 1 (Definite Male)
-389 to -130: Class 2 (Feminine Male)
-129 to 129: Class 3 (Androgyne)
130 to 389: Class 4 (Probable Transsexual)
390 to 650: Class 5 (Classic Transsexual)
Many questions are like questions on other tests by Bem and Moir-Jessel. Those tests have problems, too.
Jennifer says:
The COGIATI is a prototype. It was designed for only one target: the curious, unsure, pre-operative POTENTIAL Male-To-Female transsexual (not a post-op, not someone who is already certain, not a Female-To-Male, not anyone else who fails to fit the stated definition target). Further, it was constructed for that given target only because no scientifically and medically based test for such people exists. None. Anywhere. I saw that there was a void, no physicians were filling it, and so I set to work. The COGIATI is a challenge to the scientific and medical community to follow my example, and do a better job than I.
While this is a good goal, I think the test is based on bad ideas and bad science. Some tests look like science, but they are not. This fake science is called pseudoscience.
People who like their score will think it is a good test. That is called bias.
To learn more on why gender tests are bad, go here.
Some gender questioning people ask me about online “gender tests.” I think gender tests are pseudoscience. They look like science but are not. I worry these tests might hurt some people who take them. They might make a bad choice in life because of the results. I think these tests are very bad for young people and for people without much school.
Why gender tests are bad
1. You do not learn anything new from gender tests
Some people take the tests for fun or as a joke. That is great!
If you are taking one because you are questioning your gender and want answers, you need to be careful. You already know that you might want to make changes. It is better to talk in person with people who can help. Online tests seem like easy answers, but there are no easy answers.
2. You can often get the score you want
You can often tell which answers are “masculine” or “feminine.” Your score may also change based on when or how you take the test.
3. You might make big choices based on your score
A quick test with a score is less work than thinking hard about how you feel. Some people use the score as “proof” they should do something. Big choices should not be based on an online test. Do not use a number or category from your test score to make a big life choice.
Some people do not like to make big choices. They want to be told what to do. That way if things go wrong, they can blame something.
4. Gender tests look like science, but they are not
I am happy people study sex and gender. I would be happy if a test could tell if you should make a gender change. No test can do that yet.
We do not know why some people are transgender or gender diverse yet.
That means the tests are not based on proven things.
5. Gender tests will give the wrong result to some people
Even good tests are not always right. Think of a test for cancer. Most of the time, the test is right, but sometimes it is wrong. There are two ways it can be wrong:
It says you have cancer when you do not have it (a false positive)
It says you do not have cancer, but you do (a false negative)
If enough people take a test, even a good one, some will get put in the wrong group.
Some people make a gender change, but later they wish they had not done it. This happens when you do not think hard enough about why you want to make a gender change. People who like gender tests may not want to think hard.
6. Some people use gender test scores like game scores
Some people think their score means they are “more transgender” than someone with a lower score.
Many people want to know where they stand among other people:
Gender tests seem real to some who think that “numbers don’t lie.” But gender identity can not be reduced to a number or score.
7. Gender tests say there are simple “types” for things that are not simple
People do not fit into simple types. That is what is great about people!
Many of the ways we divide people into types are too simple.
For instance, dividing people as only “gay” or “straight” gets rid of a lot of big differences. The same is true with dividing people as only “male” or “female.” Sexuality and gender are a spectrum, not a binary of two things.
Think of a rainbow. Imagine saying there are only two colors: warm and cool. That would get rid of a lot of colors!
Background
When I was in grade school, there was a “gender test” we used to tell if someone was a boy or girl by how they looked at their fingernails: if you look at your nails with fingers bent and palm facing you, you were a boy, and if you looked at them with fingers straight and the back of your hand facing you, you were a girl.
This kind of belief is called a stereotype. A stereotype is an idea or image of a group of people or things that is too simple. Some people might not match their stereotype. Some adults think we can split people in types based on stereotypes.
A note on horoscopes
Horoscopes are another way to classify people that is fake science. It takes something scientific (looking at the stars and when you were born) and says that you are a type based on that stuff. People who believe in it say everyone falls into one of twelve types. Each type acts in different ways. Capricorns act this way, and Cancers act that way.
Horoscopes are a lot like gender tests. People hear what they want in the results. In science, this is called confirmation bias. There are even people who plan their day based on a horoscope. That is about as smart as planning your life based on a gender test.
Things like “gender tests” and horoscopes should only be done for fun.
Here are some of the “gender tests” you might hear people talk about:
COGIATI (Combined Gender Identity And Transsexuality Inventory)
These are all fake science and should not be taken seriously.
This page uses easy words. This helps young people read it. This also helps people who donât know many English words. The words in bold are hard. You need to know what they mean, or this will be hard to read. You can use these links to looks up words you donât know: Merriam-Websterâs Learnerâs Dictionary Cambridge Learnerâs Dictionary
Nancy Henley was an American psychologist and sibling of the birth parent of notorious transgender troll Kiira Triea aka Denise Magner. Henley’s sibling Dorothy Main Magner was Magner’s birth parent. Magner incorporated aspects of Henley’s work and life into a fabricated autobiography. Magner was also involved in maintaining Johns Hopkins email servers through family connections there.
Background
Nancy Eloise Main Henley was born on October 27, 1934 in Palatka, Florida. Henley began her education at Johns Hopkins after getting married and starting a family, earning a bachelor’s degree in 1964, a master’s degree in 1967, and a doctorate in 1968. Henley was affiliated with University of Maryland, Baltimore County from 1968â1971, Lowell Technological Institute/University of Lowell, from 1974â1980, and University of California, Los Angeles from 1980â1994. Most of Henley’s writing was on gender, feminism, language, and the social psychology of power.
Henley retired to Glen Burnie, Maryland and died there from a stroke on June 4, 2016.
My name is Andrea James. I am a writer and activist based here in Los Angeles. You can read about my work at the link below. Like you, my areas of interest include gender and violence (I have done anti-violence projects with Jane Fonda and Eve Ensler as well as Patti Giggans at Peace Over Violence/LACAAW), and I know much of your work covers these topics.
I am writing to you because I am doing some fact checking on an upcoming project, and I am interested in profiling a woman named Denise Tree, who says she is your niece. In the interest of being thorough, I felt it would be prudent to confirm this directly with you prior to publication.
Below is the quotation from Denise that prompted my note (presented verbatim):
âI strongly reccommend _Language, Gender and Society_ ed. in part by my aunt, Nancy Henley. Chock full of good reading about sex dichotymous verbal and non-verbal communications and also how “sex” is hardwired into language itself.Â
đ Yes it’s afavorite – The Estelle and Dorothy in the dedication is my grandmother and mother.â
Because the dedication in your book Language, Gender and Society lists Estella, not Estelle, I felt I should confirm with you. Denise also says your sister Dorothy lived in the Philippines in the 1950s and was in a relationship with Deniseâs father, a Finnish man. She says Dorothy gave birth to her on Clark Air Base in the Philippines and later moved from Finland to Baltimore in the 1960s, where Dorothy married someone else.
If Denise is your niece, I hope you understand that I am merely trying to be as thorough as possible in my fact-checking. I have been doing research for a long time, and my instincts told me I should confirm this information directly with you. If this information about your sister is not correct, I obviously do not want to publish any misinformation, and I would like to get a correction out there.
Thanks for any confirmation you can provide. I will follow up with a call as well, and I appreciate your time!
Sincerely, Andrea
I did not receive a reply.
References
Rutherford A, Dean K (2016). Nancy Main Henley (1934â2016). American Psychologist, Vol 71(9), Dec 2016, 976. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000088
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 âwhen Bailey says that sexual preference and gender identity are not two entirely independent dimensions, he is not necessarily wrongâ, 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 âconflict can be created around this issueâ. The psychologist agrees that not all transsexuals are heavily gender-dysphoric in youth. She attributes the dominance of âthe woman captured in a manâs bodyâ image, to itâs endless repetition by the media.
[…] Gooren is scathing about Blanchardâs work. […] Cohen-Kettenis shares Goorenâs 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. âIn the second group, during puberty cross-dressing is often paired with sexual excitement â she says. âWhen they enter treatment however, the cross dressing is very restfulâ.
Cohen-Kettenis estimates half the number of TSs are secondary TSs. Whether all secondary TSs have had a autogynephile history she cannot say. âExtreme 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.â
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
John Higgon is a British psychologist and anti-transgender activist. Higgon is supportive of the disputed diagnosis “rapid onset gender dysphoria” and supports “gender exploratory therapy,” a form of non-affirming care for trans youth. Higgon is involved with SPLC-designated hate group Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM), which led to the creation of conversion therapy lobby group Genspect.
Background
Higgon is a psychologist with Dumfries & Galloway Health & Social Care. Much of Higgon’s work is with older patients.
Anti-transgender activism
Higgon was one of several signatories who praised the Cass Review that finally closed the UK’s inefficient Tavistock youth gender clinic and opened the door for decentralized care for gender diverse youth. Higgon and friends celebrated the closure for different reasons in a response. Co-signers were:
Prof David Pilgrim, Chartered Clinical Psychologist
Dr Maja Bowen [aka “Isidora Sanger”/”la scapigliata”
Dr Tessa Katz, GP
Dr Ellen Wright, GP
Higgon syas:
We think the current guidelines effectively prohibit psychologists from taking a questioning approach and applying ethical practice in these situations. The absence of a robust evidence base supporting psychological and medical intervention is a concern in this rapidly growing population, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of many relevant issues. The disproportionate increase in presentations of females to services, the phenomenon of so-called Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria, the voices of individuals who have desisted or detransitioned, and the experiences of those for whom existing treatments have been of value must all be addressed in the search for quality research informing best-evidence practice. Such research can only be conducted in an environment that is open to discussion in a respectful and professionally inquisitive manner.
Higgon et al (03 August 2022). Time for honest reflection, not defence. The British Psychological Society https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/time-honest-reflection-not-defence
Higgon et al (03 September 2020). Freedom of expression around diversity guidelines. The British Psychological Society https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/freedom-expression-around-diversity-guidelines
David Bell, Lucy Griffin, Seth Bhunoo, Sallie Baxendale, Az Hakeem, Louise irvine, John Higgon, Madeleine Ni Dhalaigh, Robin Ion, Bob Withers, David Pilgrim, Maja Bowen, Tessa Katz, Ellen Wright (2022). Comment: Review of gender identity services for children and young people. BMJ 2022; 376 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o629 (Published 10 March 2022)Cite this as: BMJ 2022;376:o629
Resources
Dumfries and Galloway Health and Social Care (dghscp.co.uk)