The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) is a gender test that was developed by Sandra Lipsitz Bem (1944–2014), 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 Bem’s 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 Bem’s 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 don’t 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 don’t know: Merriam-Webster’s Learner’s Dictionary Cambridge Learner’s 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 1968–1971, Lowell Technological Institute/University of Lowell, from 1974–1980, and University of California, Los Angeles from 1980–1994. 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):
“I 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.
🙂 Yes it’s afavorite – The Estelle and Dorothy in the dedication is my grandmother and mother.”
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 Denise’s 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 (1934–2016). 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 “when Bailey says that sexual preference and gender identity are not two entirely independent dimensions, he is not necessarily wrong”, she says.
In contrast to Bailey, Cohen-Kettenis expresses herself very diplomatic. As no other she knows the sensitivity of this terrain and the ease with which a “conflict can be created around this issue”. The psychologist agrees that not all transsexuals are heavily gender-dysphoric in youth. She attributes the dominance of “the woman captured in a man’s body” image, to it’s endless repetition by the media.
[…] Gooren is scathing about Blanchard’s work. […] Cohen-Kettenis shares Gooren’s objections to terms like homosexual and non-homosexual transsexuals. She would rather differentiate between early and late onset transsexuals. But apart from the terminology, these groups are very similar to those of Bailey and Blanchard. Primary TSs are more often homosexual while secondary TSs usually have had straight relationships before entering treatment, Cohen-Kettenis explains. “In the second group, during puberty cross-dressing is often paired with sexual excitement ” she says. “When they enter treatment however, the cross dressing is very restful”.
Cohen-Kettenis estimates half the number of TSs are secondary TSs. Whether all secondary TSs have had a autogynephile history she cannot say. “Extreme gender dysphoria can, I think, come to be in all sorts of ways. Secondary TSs are a very diverse group. We also see people who still are autogynephile.”
Cohen-Kettenis thinks that patient care will not be influenced by this theory. TSs do not have to fear that Cohen would see autogynophilia as a disqualification for treatment. The decisive factor is the suffering of the client, and whether treatment can indeed help to relieve the pain. In this, Blanchard and Bailey agree and mention that autogynophiliacs do not have a higher rate of post-treatment regrets.
Vermij, Peter (September 27, 2003). Een man gevangen in een mannenlichaam.NRC https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2003/09/27/een-man-gevangen-in-een-mannenlichaam-7655797-a1162822 Translation: Arianne van der Ven.
Selected publications by Cohen-Kettenis
Dan J. Stein, Peter Szatmari, Wolfgang Gaebel, Michael Berk, Eduard Vieta, Mario Maj, Ymkje Anna de Vries, Annelieke M. Roest, Peter de Jonge, Andreas Maercker, Chris R. Brewin, Kathleen M. Pike, Carlos M. Grilo, Naomi A. Fineberg, Peer Briken, Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis & Geoffrey M. Reed (2020). Mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders in the ICD-11: an international perspective on key changes and controversies. BMC Med18, 21 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-1495-2
Walter Bockting is a Dutch psychologist who has studied transgender health.
Background
Bockting received his doctoral degree in psychology in 1988 from the Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
From 1988 to 1990, he did a Post-Doctoral Clinical/Research Fellowship in the Program in Human Sexuality at University of Minnesota Medical Schoo’s Department of Family Medicine and Community Health. Hi completed his PhD in 1998.
Bockting was on faculty at the Program in Human Sexuality from 1988 – 2012. During his tenure at PHS, he served as a psychologist, professor, and coordinator of transgender health services. He was also on the graduate faculty of Feminist Studies and a co-founder of the University’s Center for CAH and Disorders of Sex Development.
2006: Fellow, Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality
In 2012 he joined the faculty of Columbia University. His research interests include gender identity development, transgender health, sexuality and the Internet, and HIV prevention, and his work has been supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, the American Foundation for AIDS Research, and the Minnesota Department of Health.
Publications
Bockting is the author of many scientific articles and editor of five books:
Gender Dysphoria: Interdisciplinary Approaches in Clinical Management (Haworth Press, 1992)
Transgender and HIV: Risks, Prevention, and Care (Haworth Press, 2001)
Masturbation as a Means of Achieving Sexual Health (Haworth Press, 2002)
Transgender Health and HIV Prevention (Haworth Press, 2005)
Guidelines for Transgender Care (The Haworth Press, 2006)
He served as editor of the International Journal of Transgenderism, and serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Homosexuality. He is past president of the World Professional Organization for Transgender Health, past president and fellow of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, and vice-president of the North American Federation of Sexuality Organizations.
Bockting is a member of WPATH and works at the Gender Clinic at University of Minnesota. Much of his work is on disease and drug use in the transgender community. Bockting has written a review of Bailey’s book scheduled for publication in the near future. Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality.
Media
Walter Bockting | 1 | #ColumbiaPride
References
How Far Has Transgender Health Come Since Stonewall?
Bockting, W. O. (2005). Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality. [Review of the book The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. J. M. Bailey]. Journal of Sex Research, 42(3), 267-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490509552281
Eli Coleman (born August 25, 1948) is an American sexologist who has been involved in issues related to transgender health.
Background
Coleman was born in Buffalo, New York and grew up in Montreal, Canada later moving to Chicago, Illinois.
He earned a bachelor’s degree in psychology and history at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and his master’s in psychology at the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh. He pursued further graduate work at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, and completed his Ph.D. in counseling psychology at the University of Minnesota in 1978. He became an instructor and then professor in the University’s Program in Human Sexuality in 1978.
He is the founding editor of International Journal of Transgenderism and International Journal of Sexual Health, and he has served in leadership roles for several professional societies, including as President of HBIGDA (now WPATH). Coleman became director of the Program in Human Sexuality in 1991.
Comments on Bailey (2003)
HBIGDA President blasts Bailey book
Urges assembled experts on transgenderism to “challenge bad science”
Release date: September 13, 2003
Ghent, Belgium — The outgoing President of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (HBIGDA) sharply criticized J. Michael Bailey’s recent book as an example of “bad science” about transgenderism.
Dr. Eli Coleman of the University of Minnesota made the remarks during his keynote speech at HBIGDA’s 18th Biennial Symposium in Ghent, Belgium today.
Addressing an audience of the world’s foremost experts on gender identity, Coleman proposed a 10-point blueprint of current and future goals for the organization.
As he outlined the need to “promote sound and ethical research,” Dr. Coleman made a direct reference to The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University. The book has been widely denounced as scientifically unsound and deeply biased.
Dr. Coleman urged members to work with the transgender community to “end antipathy and distrust of researchers.” To illustrate what Dr. Coleman called “unfortunate setbacks” to ending this problem, he displayed the Bailey book cover. The book’s provocative title and image of masculine legs and feet in feminine shoes are widely considered to be deliberately insulting. Referring to Bailey’s shoddy scholarship and deeply flawed research methods, Dr. Coleman emphatically declared: “We need to challenge bad science.”
HBIGDA President’s speech cites the 2003 book ‘The Man Who Would Be Queen’ among “unfortunate setbacks” for trans people.
Jamison Green, a writer and educator recently appointed to the group’s Board of Directors, said of Coleman’s speech: “He was urging HBIGDA as an organization and the membership as a whole (as individuals) to become more assertive in addressing social and political issues that affect transpeople.”
Following the speech, HBIGDA’s incoming President Walter Meyer, M.D. vowed to pursue Dr. Coleman’s 10-point plan:
Promote sexual health including the elimination of barriers to sexual health
Learn from other cultures
Let old paradigms die and new paradigms emerge
Provide access to optimal care
Provide training to allied health professionals
Promote sound and ethical research
End stigma and discrimination
Change laws and social policies
Change religious views
Promote social tolerance for diversity
Dr. Coleman also cited important recent work done by HBIGDA, including expert testimony in a Florida custody case won by a trans father, and the need to fight renewed efforts by the religious groups which still stigmatize transpeople.
In May 2005, Dr. Coleman reiterated his opinion about the Bailey book at the IFGE conference, calling it a “setback.” For more, see Lynn Conway‘s report, linked below.
References
Conway, Lynn (April 30, 2005) Dr. Eli Coleman Rebukes J. Michael Bailey’s Book at IFGE 2005. [link]
Resources
University of Minnesota Medical School (med.umn.edu)
Many people in our community have been helped by psychologists who worked with them to determine the best course of action for their unique transition needs. Psychology has also been used as a way to control and even harm our community, especially via disease models of gender identity and expression.
At its worst, psychology has been misused in the academic exploitation of our community.
Maxine E. Petersen-Lee is a Canadian psychologist and prominent supporter of disease models of gender identity and expression. Petersen is transgender and is best known for being quoted by J. Michael Bailey in The Man Who Would Be Queen saying, “Most gender patients lie.”
Background
Petersen earned a master’s degree from University of Toronto in 1986 with a thesis titled “Male gender dysphoria and criminality.” Petersen then worked at Toronto’s notorious Clarke Institute, making a gender transition in 1991. Petersen worked closely with Ray Blanchard, Betty Steiner, and Robert Dickey at “Jurassic Clarke,” as the facility was known for its regressive views and policies. Petersen was called an “ace clinician” by Bailey. Petersen and spouse had two children before divorcing. Since starting a new relationship, Petersen sometimes uses the surname Petersen-Lee. Petersen has lived in Innisfil, Ontario and participated in motorsports competitions.
Biographer Zagria Cowan outlined just a few of the ways Petersen was involved in gatekeeping:
In 2000, she and Robert Dickey denied Synthia Kavanagh approval for SRS in that, being in prison, she could not do a Real Life Test. In the same year they were quoted in Vivian Namaste’s book defending the requirement that a trans person should do a year’s Real Life Test before starting hormones, and as critical of activists demanding hormones and surgery as a right. In September 2003 Maxine testified at an Ontario Human Rights Tribunal that government funding should be re-instated for SRS. In November 2003 she resigned from HBIGDA X (Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association, now WPATH) when her boss Ray Blanchard did because it criticized Michael Bailey’s book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, 2003, an act which she described as ‘political correctness’. She now lists her name as Maxine Petersen-Lee and offers private counselling.
Resignation from HBIGDA (2003)
Petersen was part of the committee that revised the HBIGDA Standards of Care in 1998. Petersen resigned from the organization when boss Ray Blanchard did.
From: Maxine Petersen Sent: 11/5/03 8:10 AM Subject: Letter of Resignation November 4, 2003
Walter J. Meyer, III., M.D. President, Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association Department of Psychiatry University of Texas Medical Branch 301 University Blvd. Galveston, TX 77555-0189 USA
Bean Robinson, Ph.D. Executive Director, Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association 1300 South 2nd St., #180 Minneapolis, MN 55454 USA
Dear Drs. Meyer and Robinson:
I am writing today regarding the letter sent on behalf of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association Board of Directors and Officers in response to a letter from a number of transsexual Internet activists who have taken exception to the work of Professor J. Michael Bailey.
As a transwoman and a member of the committee that was responsible for the 1998 revision of the Standards of Care, I am intensely saddened and shocked that the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association has taken such an irresponsible action. I have worked for more than twenty-one years for the betterment of hundreds of transsexual patients/clients and have consistently supported healthcare funding for sex reassignment surgery in my home province. I have also published a number of papers on the treatment of transsexual individuals.
As recently as September of 2003 I testified against our government at a Provincial Human Rights Tribunal in support of a number of complainants seeking to have funding for sex reassignment surgery restored to our publicly funded Provincial healthcare plan.
The actions of the Board in this matter have tarnished the reputation of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association. By failing to grasp the importance of scientific research to be above the political correctness that is so pervasive in our society, you have perhaps unwittingly but clearly sent a signal to other researchers that they “dare not” explore certain areas of research for fear of the same or similar threat to their career. If there has been any breach of ethical standards, it is up to Northwestern University to investigate these allegations, and that is what they are in the process of doing.
I am certain not one of us wants to see the day when politics trumps scientific inquiry. I have noted recently the considerable justifiable concern expressed by scientists in the U.S. about the Federal Government interfering with or even hinting at withdrawal of funding for research in sexology and the chilling effect this appears to have had on researchers. It is ironic that the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association seems to have taken a page out of the book of the Bush government and done exactly the same thing.
Regrettably, your actions leave me with no option but to resign my membership in the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association.
Sincerely,
Maxine Petersen, MA, C. Psych. Assoc. Coordinator, Gender Identity Clinic Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Lecturer, University of Toronto, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry
Johnson, Micheline (2017). A History of Trans-People. In A History of Trans, a Canadian Perspective. https://web.ncf.ca/fm120/Trans/History/Chapter_2-Trans-People.pdf
Influx (June 2, 2008). CAMH Support Group, Part 2.I’m In Flux. http://iminflux.blogspot.com/2008/06/camh-support-group-part-2.html
Bailey JM (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen: the science of gender-bending and transsexualism. Joseph Henry Press ISBN 978-0309084185
Namaste VK (2000). Invisible Lives: The Erasure of Transsexual and Transgendered People. University of Chicago Press, 199-201. ISBN 978-0226568102
Levine SB et al. (1999). The Standards of Care for Gender Identity Disorders. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality. Volume 11, 1999 – Issue 2Pages 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1300/J056v11n02_01
Petersen ME, Dickey R (1995). Surgical sex reassignment: A comparative survey of International centers. Archives of Sexual Behavior, volume 24, pages135–156 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541578
[Publications under the name Leonard H. “Len” Clemmensen]
Stermac L, Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH, Dickey R (1991). Group therapy for gender-dysphoric heterosexual men, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 17:4, 252-258. https://doi.org/0.1080/00926239108404349
Blanchard R, Steiner BW, Clemmensen LH (1989). Prediction of Regrets in Postoperative Transsexuals. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, February 1, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674378903400111
Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH (1988) A test of the dsm‐III‐R’S implicit assumption that fetishistic arousal and gender dysphoria are mutually exclusive. The Journal of Sex Research, 25:3, 426 432. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498809551472
Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH, Steiner BW (1987). Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria. Archives of Sexual Behavior. volume 16, pages139–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542067
Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH, Steiner BW (1985). Social desirability response set and systematic distortion in the self-report of adult male gender patients. Archives of Sexual Behavior 14, 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541751
Blanchard R, Steiner BW, Clemmensen LH (1985). Gender dysphoria, gender reorientation, and the clinical management of transsexualism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(3), 295–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.53.3.295
Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH, Steiner BW (1983). Gender reorientation and psychosocial adjustment in male-to-female transsexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior12, 503–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542212
Clemmensen LH (1990). The “Real Life Test” for Surgical Candidates, in Blanchard R, Steiner BW (eds). Clinical management of gender identity disorders in children and adults (pp. 121-135). ISBN 978-0880481878
Clemmensen LH (1986). Male gender dysphoria and criminality. University of Toronto, Unpublished master’s thesis, 1986.
Blanchard R, Steiner BW, Clemmensen LH (July 1985). Gender Dysphoria, Gender Reorientation, and the Clinical Management of Transsexualism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(3):295-304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.53.3.295
Blanchard R, Clemmensen LH, Steiner BW (1983). Gender reorientation and psychosocial adjustment in male-to-female transsexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior 1983 Dec;12(6):503-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542212
Madeline H. “Maddie” Wyndzen (born 1973) is the pen name of an American psychologist who wrote about gender identity and expression from both professional and personal perspectives between 1997 and 2008. Wyndzen wrote a number of important criticisms of disease models of sex and gender minorities.
Background
In 1997, Wyndzen created an early online gender transition resource on GeoCities called Gender Outside the Lines. The site was moved to the Gender Web domain in 1998. In 2001, Wyndzen changed the name to All Mixed Up and moved it to the domain genderpsychology.org. Wyndzen initially used the name Katherine Heather and Katie, switching to “Madeline H. Wyndzen” in 2004 for professional reasons:
I have found in more and more awkward not to have a last name. For example, in order to cite my essays in APA style, you would start with my last name. That is why I created a pen name, “Madeline H. Wyndzen.” Please use this name in all citations, publications, and correspondence with me. I also feel that separating my real name from this web-site can help me step away from transgender issues while I work on other priorities.
In 2003, Wyndzen published one of the first scientific critiques of the disputed diagnosis “autogynephilia” created in 1989 by Ray Blanchard. Blanchard’s ideas had just been popularized by J. Michael Bailey in the book The Man Who Would Be Queen and on Anne Lawrence’s website. Wyndzen mailed the following notification of the new website material on 13 May 2003:
Scientific critique of autogynephilia & psychopathology model of transsexualism
Hi Everyone,
Ray Blanchard’s Mis-Directed Sex-Drive model of transsexuality, including the controversial notion of autogynephilia, has received a great deal of attention recently. It has had a remarkable amount of success in pervading both general audience and professional medium: Anne Lawrence and J. Michael Bailey each wrote popular accounts, the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] and HB-SOC [Harry Benjamin Standards of Care] now include reference to Blanchard’s constructs, and I have heard that even textbooks have started to feature it.
I find this trend disconcerting as both a transsexual and a scientific psychologist. I feel the evidence for this theory is weak. Interpreting this theory to say that MtF [male-to-female] transsexuals are ‘really’ gay men or ‘really’ crossdressing men is insensitive. Many perspectives on this controversy have been expressed. Typically the scientific perspective has been held by those most supportive of Blanchard’s model. I would like to advance a scientific perspective that is skeptical of Blanchard’s model and the ability of any Psycho-pathological model to adequately understand transgenderism. Some of you may be interested in the following two new essays found on my web-site (links are below).
Though the mental health community intends to help transsexuals, embedded within psychopathology is an insensitivity towards the very people it seeks to help. Removal of the mental illness diagnostic categories “Gender Identity Disorder” and “Transvestic Fetishism” is recommended to allow for objective scientific work and to heal the divisive relationships between the mental health and transgender communities. Included in this essay is a discussion of the idea that we are ‘really’ our biological sex according to Blanchard’s model. Also included is a discussion of the claim that transsexuals who deny a sexual motivation for their gender dysphoria are lying.
This essay provides a scientific critique of Blanchard’s model. It includes a summary of the model’s key points and the evidence supporting those points. It continues to address what may be numerous serious methodological flaws. The essay also addresses the clinical intuition that sexuality may be the only force powerful enough to explain transsexuality by showing how the psychological literature suggests identity is also a remarkably powerful mechanism.
Any feedback about these essays is always appreciated. I would very much appreciate if you would please forward this message to other transgender mailing lists where Blanchard’s model has been a significant or recent topic.
Best wishes, [Madeline – signed “Katie” in the original]
Editor’s Note: Ms. Wyndzen originally submitted a brief letter to the editor in response to a recent book review of The Man Who Would Be Queen in this Newsletter. I invited her to expand on that letter here.
If a man sought therapy due to unhappiness over his attraction to other men, a therapist would likely diagnose him with Depression. If a transsexual sought therapy due to unhappiness over his or her biological sex, a therapist would almost certainly diagnose him or her with Gender Identity Disorder. Whereas gay men and lesbian women are diagnosed for how they suffer, transsexuals are diagnosed for who they are. As a psychologist and transsexual, I find that the mental illness label imposed on transsexuality is just as disquieting as the label that used to be imposed on homosexuality.
Similar to antiquated ideas suggesting that homosexuality is a deviant sex-drive, Ray Blanchard (1989, 1991) proposed that transsexuality is a mis-directed form of either heterosexuality (named “autogynephilia”) or homosexuality. Rather than asking the scientifically neutral question, “What is transgenderism?” Blanchard (1991) asks, “What kind of defect in a male’s capacity for sexual learning could produce … autogynephilia, transvestitism …?” (p. 246).
Blanchard’s model is featured prominently and uncritically in J. Michael Bailey’s (2003a) recent book, The Man who would be Queen: the Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. A balanced portrait of Blanchard’s key empirical findings (1989) would reveal that they: (1) have never been replicated, (2) failed to include control groups of typically-gendered women, (3) failed to covary the acknowledged age-differences from ANOVA, and (4) drew conclusions about causality from entirely observational data.
Inconsistencies between transsexuals’ self-portraits and Blanchard’s model are reconciled by Bailey (2003a) with the suggestion that some transsexuals are deceptive: “There is one more reason why many autogynephiles provide misleading information about themselves that is different than outright lying. It has to do with obsession” (p. 175). Aware of concerns that some may be troubled by his portrayal of them, Bailey has said, “I cannot be a slave to sensitivity” (quoted in Wilson, 2003), and “ There is good scientific evidence that says you should believe me and not them” (quoted in Dreier & Anderson, 2003). In a critique of Bailey’s book available on my website, I provide alternate interpretations of this evidence: http://www.genderpsychology.org/autogynephilia/
Bailey (2003b) contends that negative reactions to his book are merely “identity politics” that are a “hindrance” to “scientific truth” (Bailey, 2003b). Contrasting his objectivity with others’ politics reminded me of “81 Words,” a radio documentary about the removal of homosexuality from the DSM (Spiegel, 2002). Those who diagnosed ‘homosexuality’ as a mental illness genuinely felt that they were helping their clients. I know that Ray Blanchard, J. Michael Bailey, and others are similarly concerned about the welfare of transsexuals. I only wish they would see the bias in their theories and diagnoses. When I listened to “81 Words,” I was struck by how foreign it sounded to talk about being gay or lesbian as a disorder. I am too young to remember that time. My hope is that someday my children will think it just as unfathomable that I was once diagnosed and treated for “Gender Identity Disorder.”
References
Bailey, J. M. (2003a). The Man who would be queen: the science of genderbending and transsexualism. Joseph Henry Press, Washington DC.
Bailey, J. M. (2003b, July 19). Identity politics as a hindrance to scientific truth, presented at the conference of the International Academy of Sex Research. Abstract retrieved July 16, 2003, from http://www.iasr.org/meeting/2003/ABSTRACTS2003.doc
Blanchard, R. (1989). The Concept of Autogynephilia and the Typology of Male Gender Dysphoria. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 177(10), 616-623.
Blanchard, R. (1991). Clinical Observations and systematic studies of autogynephilia. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 17(4), 235-251.
Dreier, S. and Anderson, K. (2003, April 21). Prof’s book challenges opinions of human sexuality. The Daily Northwestern, retrieved December 31, 2003, from http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/
Spiegel, A. (2002, January 18). 81 words. This American Life, retrieved January 18, 2002 from http://www.thislife.org/pages/descriptions/02/204.html
Wilson, R. (2003, June 20). Dr. Sex’: A human-sexuality expert creates controversy with a new book on gay men and transsexuals. Chronicle of Higher Education, retrieved June 27, 2003, from http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i41/41a00801.htm
Comments on J. Michael Bailey’s book
In 2005, Wyndzen expanded earlier online materials to summarize the controversy and criticisms of Bailey from professional and personal perspectives.
The World according to J. Michael Bailey inside “The Man who would be Queen: The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism”
J. Michael Bailey’s book, “The Man who would be Queen: The Science of Gender Bending and Transsexualism” has disrupted the lives of transgendered persons and the lives of mental health professionals who work with them. Some psychologists question the truthfulness of their transgendered clients. Some transgendered persons question if the therapists conceal a dismissive cynicism underneath an exterior of unconditional acceptance. It has become acceptable for transgendered persons to dismiss each others feelings as deception. And it has become acceptable for psychological researchers to regard the feelings of transsexuals as merely politics getting in the way of important work.
As a psychological scientist and a transsexual I find myself both deeply affected by this controversy and in a unique position to interpret it. The following essays are my attempt to make sense of Bailey’s book and the controversy surrounding it.
Wyndzen has written about how gender identity and expression are covered in the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV):
In 1994, the DSM-IV committee replaced the diagnosis of Transsexualism with Gender Identity Disorder. Depending on their age, those with a strong and persistent cross-gender identification and a persistent discomfort with his or her sex or a sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex were to be diagnosed as Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood (302.6), Adolescence, or Adulthood (302.85). For persons who did not meet the criteria, Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (GIDNOS)(302.6) was to be used.
That version also listed “Transvestic Fetishism” (302.3) under paraphilias.
Comment on Alice Dreger’s target article
In 2008, Wyndzen published a peer commentary responding to a target article by historian Alice Dreger. The article was published by Kenneth Zucker in Archives of Sexual Behavior, a sexology journal where Bailey served on the editorial board. Zucker had been praised throughout Bailey’s book, so many Zucker critics saw this as a conflict of interest. Dreger had also given a draft to anti-trans activist Benedict Carey at the New York Times a year before publication. Carey had given favorable coverage to Bailey before with his 2005 piece “Gay, Straight, or Lying: Bisexuality Revisited.” That piece uncritically repeated Bailey’s claims that male bisexuality does not exist. Carey’s 2007 favorable coverage of Dreger painted Bailey as a “scientist under siege.” In 2008, Wyndzen’s commentary was published with a number of others:
A social psychology of a history of a snippet in the psychology of transgenderism.
Alice Dreger wrote an oral history for the Archives of Sexual Behavior, “The Controversy Surrounding ‘The Man Who Would Be Queen: A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age. Though Dreger suggests disagreeing with autogynephila is the focal point of the backlash against J. Michael Bailey, I suggest from the historical pattern that Bailey experienced a backlash because he accused those who disagree with him of lying. Merely acknowledging autogynephilia or opposing a “feminine essence model” provoked little controversy. I explain Dreger’s misconstrued historical account and Bailey, Anne Lawrence, and Ray Blanchard’s over-simplified psychological accounts with common biases described by social psychology: fundamental attribution error, group polarization, groupthink, stereotyping, representativeness heuristic, base-rate neglect, framing effects, and the correspondence bias. Journal editor Kenneth Zucker offered the opportunity to write responses. Though we have very different perspectives on autogynephilia and the way transgendered persons are understood by psychology, he graciously agreed to include my response.
In 2008, Canadian anti-trans extremist James Cantor began editing Wikipedia under the pseudonyms MarionTheLibrarian and WriteMakesRight. Cantor quickly began self-promoting and removing criticisms. It soon became clear that Cantor was behind the accounts, and Cantor was ultimately banned from Wikipedia.
Among Cantor’s early edits were attempts to remove all references to Wyndzen’s work from Wikipedia.
I told Wyndzen about Cantor’s activities, and Wyndzen wrote the letter below to Wikipedia editors on July 31, 2008 in hopes of having Cantor’s suppression reverted. Despite a year of effort by Wyndzen, Cantor prevailed in keeping Wyndzen from being cited on Wikipedia. This controversy marked the end of Wyndzen’s public writings about gender.
—
Dear Andrea James,
Thank you for letting me know about James Cantor’s effort to remove reference to my work from Wikipedia. Though disappointing, it is also flattering that he considers this worth his time. Perhaps he recognizes the accuracy of my critique of autogynephilia and he worries that when other behavioral scientists read it (especially those not already committed to a side), they will recognize how weak Ray Blanchard’s model is. James Cantor and his colleagues may also be starting to recognize the larger problem of beginning their account with the assumption of a mental illness model and how it results in stereotypes of transgender persons. They may be worried about the ongoing debate about including transgendered persons in the DSM for being who they are; censoring Wikipedia so it only showcases their side as reliable might delay uncommitted psychiatrists and psychologists from readily finding the scientific accounts on the other side. It’s a clever manipulation of our scientific heuristic that peer-reviewed journals contain more credible information. Like all heuristics that usually work, it sometimes fails. It fails in this case because the journals are part of a mental health community that begins with the assumption that we are mentally ill for being who we are. Those who begin from a neutral or positive perspective on transgenderism lack journals of their own.
Imagine what James Cantor’s life as a gay man would be like today if those at the American Psychiatric Association dismissed Dr. Anonymous as “unreliable” because he did not publish against the mental illness model of homosexuality in a peer-reviewed journal or because he protected his identity. As psychology professors, James Cantor and I both know that it’s the quality of our arguments that matter – not our names, credentials, or the sources in which we publish. Perhaps the transgender community should gently remind him that you cannot raise yourself up by pushing others down. Even if he continues to behave unscientifically, I am not sure why this persuades other Wikipedia editors? I thought the spirit of Wikipedia was to be neutral, present all sides, and let readers judge for themselves? It’s a spirit I agree with. When Anne Lawrence introduced autogynephilia to the transgender community, I discussed with Ray Blanchard exposing a wider audience to his original work and he graciously allowed me to post some of his writing on my website. Maybe James Cantor feels better believing I am unreliable. Maybe others will feel that I am credible because of my decade of involvement in the trans-community and my numerous efforts to bridge the divide between transgender and psychological communities. If it may help, please feel free to post this message. I hope you are successful in preserving Wikipedia’s principled neutral stance.
Best wishes, Madeline Wyndzen http://www.GenderPsychology.org/
Wyndzen MH (2008). A social psychology of a history of a snippet in the psychology of transgenderism. Arch Sex Behav. 2008 Jun;37(3):498-502; discussion 505-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9340-2. [link]
