Charlotte Anjelica Kieltyka is an American photographer and artist credited by her real name and by the pseudonym Cher Mondavi in J. Michael Bailey’s anti-transgender book The Man Who Would Be Queen. She is prominently featured throughout. Kieltyka is also featured prominently in the defense of Bailey by Alice Dreger.
Charlotte Anjelica Kieltyka was born February 5, 1951. Kieltyka grew up in the Chicago area and attended University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign from 1969 to 1972. In 1973, she won grand prize in the annual Chicago Tribune photography contest. She made a gender transition in the 1980s.
Kieltyka contacted Bailey in the mid-1990s after seeing him on television talking about “transsexualism.” She hoped to explain how she viewed her own life trajectory and to share her theories about gender and sex with someone she saw as a respected authority. This led to a long-standing relationship where Kieltyka would get further validation and attention by performing in front of Bailey’s exploitative classes on sexuality until Northwestern University cancelled the course permanently. Kieltyka would in turn provide Bailey with access to young trans women she was mentoring, as well as older transgender people she knew through a local support group. Bailey would then see these women in a clinical or lab setting, and he would socialize with the young, attractive ones at nightclubs.
The Man Who Would Be Queen case report fabrication
Kieltyka contacted Lynn Conway and me after The Man Who Would Be Queen came out in 2003. She protested at the International Academy of Sex Research and filed a formal complaint with Northwestern University for the inaccurate and lurid misuse of her biographical information in that book.
Kieltyka also reported that Bailey admitted to fabricating key aspects of a case report in his book that got him tenure.
I soon recovered to ask about something else that was really troubling me about the ending to the book…..I meant the ending to the story about Danny, the last scene depicted in the Epilogue, (p. 214 – the last paragraph) :
“….A few moments later, Danny said : ‘Mummy, I need to go to the men’s room.’ I am certain that as he said that, he emphasized ‘men’s’ and looked my way. And off he went, by himself. At that moment, I became as certain as I can be of Danny’s future. “…….
What had me curious and uniquely troubled about Bailey’s description of this final scene was his absolute certainty of Danny’s future…..What had me perplexed was this presumptiveness and arrogance that he had displayed throughout his book and his life. ….Now he’s playing God or one of his prophets, in telling Danny’s future with such infallible foresight…..It was either that or he was some sort of charlatan……But Bailey is an honest and humble researcher……yet, how could he know with such certainty?
Let me re-phrase that….How could he know that Danny was going to turn out a gay man rather than a transexual woman like “Juanita”?…..His whole book was setting up this either/or proposition (leaving out a real third possible future which was Danny committing suicide!)…..Either Danny was going to be almost exactly like “Juanita” ….A real possibility because both Bailey and I knew about “Juanita’s” childhood and how it closely resembled Danny’s, and that being the case how could Bailey not be as certain of that outcome…..“How could he be so certain? is what I wanted to know…..
Asking him as I did in my best “National Enquirer” inquisitive tone of voice…..His reply……
“I made it up.”…… he said…..
Excuse me, What did you say?…..
“I said I made up that final scene….it never happened “……he replied……
I felt like my computer brain did not compute or could not compute this “DATA”, and so it just “crashed”…..This was even more incredulous then the first answer and I was not even asking whether the scene was true or fabricated ! ! ….I was dumbfounded and he was appearing to be playing both characters in …Dumb and Dumber…..maybe dumbest of all….. Of greater import, and with grave and serious consequences, he seemed to be playing both insidious and dangerous roles of quack and demi-god ….pretending to do research and creating the results that he predicted beforehand……
Kieltyka later sent the following to Professor Bailey in the wake of his claims they were friends:
Dr. Bailey, Please refrain from any future remarks about “Cher” and/or Anjelica Kieltyka as being your friend….I am not your friend…You could not be my friend and write that book….Do not link Anjelica Kieltyka to “Cher” and /or Autogynophilia and or/ non homosexual transexual except in the context that I , Anjelica Kieltyka , vehemently and emphatically refuse that classification/diagnosis/opinion by you. Any further remarks by you in print or spoken word or use of my image/video describing me, Anjelica Kieltyka as “Cher” and/or Autogynophilic/non homosexual I will consider libelous and/or slander. Most openly and honestly yours, C. Anjelica Kieltyka P.S. I hope to teach you a “great deal” more about the souls of transexual women in the days to come.
Kieltyka now sees that her attempts to express her own feelings and opinions were being exploited and misrepresented by Bailey to further his narrow agenda and interests. The entire matter has left her very troubled and distrustful, as she feels Bailey and others like Alice Dreger have duped and exploited her. Most people are not going to see past Kieltyka’s eccentricities or unique worldview. Like many of the trans people Dreger and Bailey exploit, Kieltyka is an eccentric hoarder who is socially isolated and experiences significant poverty. It is much easier for people like Bailey to reduce someone like Kieltyka to a caricature than to treat her like a human being.
Since the 2003 controversy, Kieltyka has done forensic photo analysis for the Arthur C. Pillsbury Foundation.
Surkan K (2007). Transsexuals Protest Academic Exploitation. [PDF] In Great Events from History: Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Events, 1848-2006. Lillian Faderman, ed. Salem Press, 2007, ISBN 9781587652639
Kieltyka, Anjelica (July 8, 2003). Danny vs. Juanita : Bailey’s Choice. Published at Conway, Lynn (2003). It’s Fiction! Bailey Admits to Anjelica Kieltyka that he Fabricated the Key Final Scene in His Book https://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/DannyFabrication.html
Dreger AD (2008). The Controversy Surrounding The Man Who Would Be Queen: A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2008 Jun; 37(3): 366–421.Published online 2008 Apr 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9301-1
Windsor EJ (2018). Power in the production of transgender knowledge: The controversy over The Man Who Would Be Queen. The Rutgers Journal of Sociology Knowledge in Contention, Volume II, 2018, pp. 2-37. [PDF]
Lynn Conway (lynnconway.com)
- Anjelica Kieltyka’s Story (by Lynn Conway)
- Anjelica’s adventures at the International Academy of Sex Research conference (by Lynn Conway)
- The Sinking of the Queen (by Anjelica Kieltyka)
- Cartoons (by Anjelica Kieltyka)
- Kieltyka easily vanquishes Bailey in televised Plethysmograph Challenge (by Sonia Azul)