Mike Bailey and "homosexual" transsexuals

As I said in my original introduction, Bailey, Blanchard, and Lawrence use language like chimps with loaded guns. I am working with several linguistics professors on a longer piece involving B-B-L's bigoted language and how it hurts all of us, but it's nice to see that people are at least chasing them down and backing them into a corner while we work on disarming them. I have this huge tranquilizer dart full of evidence I'm going to shoot into Bailey's ass in the next few months. Just gotta get a niiiiiiice, clean shot.

While Lynn Conway and I have been playing bad cop/worse cop, Katie at GenderPsychology has been playing good cop, and everyone should thank her for her efforts. Maybe it's because we are older and no longer have the patience for this stuff, but Lynn and I don't have time for diplomacy with these people any more. Luckily, Katie does, since her blossoming career is on the line. Personally, I think all her brilliant work could make her famous in her field, and I encourage all of you to work with her by sharing your thoughts and experiences!

Saint Katie

I am going to put a word in to the powers that be to canonize Katie. She continues with Job-like patience to work with Bailey on the bigotry inherent in his use of language. She's like a Log Cabin Republican or something, trying to give these sexist morons a clue. Here's her latest:


Bailey: still not getting it

"Single, heterosexual male" J. Michael Bailey made the following platitude to a sympathetic audience sometime in June 2003:

Michael Bailey here. I have never written that transsexuals who transition from men to women are still men. Nor has Ray Blanchard. Nor has Anne Lawrence. The phrase "men trapped in men's bodies," which applies to autogynephilic transsexuals, means simply that they are not naturally feminine in the way that homosexual m-f transsexuals are. It doesn't mean that they do not achieve femininity, and regardless of how feminine they are, once they decide to become women and enter that role (regardless of genital status), they are women, in my opinion.

Nice try, snookums.

As Mike's poster child "Cher"/Anjelica so eloquently put it on the phone to me the other day, this is equivalent to running a tiny correction in the back of the newspaper the day after running a giant front-page headline.

"Man" as a slur toward transsexuals

In our patriarchal society, most men can't imagine that being called a masculine epithet could ever be considered offensive. They usually reserve that for the feminine: bitch, sissy, pantywaist, pussy.

Calling women like me men? Them's fighting words-- the most offensive slurs available.

Man in a dress.

Man with tits.

That's no woman, man. That's a man, baby! (a parody of a cliche, no less! Our own "Me so horny!")

Dude looks like a lady.

She-male. (Janice Raymond's favorite: our own "octoroon")


Men trapped in men's bodies. (used by ultraconservatives like Anne Lawrence and Tammy Bruce)

The man who would be queen.

I find it ironic that Anne Lawrence takes issue with Bailey's book title when Dr. Lawrence is the one who started the whole trend of calling transsexuals "men" in print.

Bailey's book title and Lawrence's article title are akin to writing a book on the "two types" of greedy Jewish people and calling it:

Who Put the 'Jew' in Jewelry?

Clever? I suppose, in that bigoted kind of way. Provocative? Sure, in that offensive sort of way. Would the Anti-Defamation League be up your ass in a heartbeat? You better believe it. Well, I'm proclaiming myself the new provocateur for our community, and we're going to deal with this "man" slur in academia and medicine once and for all.

"Homosexual" as a slur toward transsexuals

As he tries to dig himself out of his hole, Bailey takes to inserting "m-f" into his "homosexual transsexual" epithet, as if this helps.

Bailey's publisher specializes in books for dummies, so let's try dumbing this down once again.


TransMath for Dummies

It's a real simple equation, Mr. washed-out Math Major:

"Homosexual" means "sexual attraction only to people of the same sex."

if relationship (R) = homosexual (h)

and partner (P) = male (m)

and transsexual (T) = homosexual (h)

then transsexual (T) = male (m)

That means if R = h, and P = m, and T = h, then T = m

No matter how you express it:

h = m + m

So solving for x:

x/T + m/P = h/R

x = m

It doesn't matter if you stick some other variable in there, you are calling us men when you call us homosexual.


Get it, dumbass?

Now riddle me this, Mike: if a "single, heterosexual male" has sex with a "homosexual transsexual," isn't the guy a fag by your logic?

I mean, if the transsexual is homosexual, isn't the partner homosexual, too?

Or does that equation not apply to self-hating tranny chasers?

Keep waving your gun around, chimpy. You're shooting holes in your own argument, and you keep winging the other two little monkeys.


Please contact me with any comments. For more on Bailey's book and the theories that inform it, check out my Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence clearinghouse.