Emailed by Robin Pinnel to multiple recipients on April 2, 2003.
from http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-atlanta-audio/2003-April/000188.html [Imc-atlanta-audio]
new book on homosexuality, transsexualism and science
Robin Pinnel rpinnel at nas.edu <mailto:email@example.com>
Wed, 2 Apr 2003 09:23:08 -0500
Dear Currents of Resistance:
I’m sure, like many programs, right now you’re focusing on war coverage, butwhen things quiet down — or when you’re looking for something new to talk about– I hope you’ll consider having J. Michael Bailey on your show. Bailey, a leading gender researcher at Northwestern University, is the author of THE MAN WHO WOULD BE QUEEN: THE SCIENCE OF GENDER-BENDING AND TRANSSEXUALISM. (THE MAN WHO WOULD BE QUEEN is published by the Joseph Henry Press, trade publisher for the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine.)
I noticed one of the topics you like to discuss are social justice issues. I believe this book touches on these issues because it talks about the science behind homosexuality and transsexualism — and the rights of transgender and homosexual citizens is definitely a major social justice issue. Bailey’s book becomes even more important when you consider that many base their opinions about these “rights” on whether or not they believe homosexuality and transsexualism is a lifestyle choice or a genetically determined trait. I think the best way to tell you more about this book is by pasting the press release into this message:
Gay, Straight, or Lying? Science Has the Answer
Leading Sex Researcher Explores Stereotypes of Gay Men, Transsexuals
Are gay men genuinely more feminine than other men? (Yes.)
Are gay men really drawn to more feminine professions? (Yes.)
Are all male transsexuals women trapped in men’s bodies? (No. Some are of them are men who are just plain turned on by the idea of becoming a women.)
In The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism,author J. Michael Bailey, an internationally recognized research and expert on the originals [sic] of human sexual orientation, explores many of the stereotypes society typically associates with gay men and transsexuals.
“Male femininity is a phenomenon that most people find interesting but which has been ignored by science due to concerns ranging from social conservatism to sensitivity — or less charitably, political correctness,” Bailey explains. “For example, despite widespread stereotypes that gay men tend to be feminine, research related to the stereotype has only recently been conducted.”
Based on his own original research, Bailey’s book is grounded firmly in science. But as he demonstrates, science doesn’t always deliver predictable or even comfortable answers.”Many gay men will not be comfortable with the assertion that they do, in fact, walk and talk different from a straight men,” Bailey asserts. “Many transsexuals do not like the idea that there are two kinds: the typical ‘woman trapped in a man’s body’ and the autogynephilic transsexual, who is a man who is so turned on by the idea of himself as a woman that he wants to become one. But my conclusions come from years of research.”
Bailey has studied, interviewed, and made friends with hundreds of men whose sexual preferences and behavior run the gamut from butch to feminine to just dressing in women’s clothing for heterosexual pleasure and men who only feel fulfilled by being transformed surgically into women. He has studied feminine men in the industrialized world as well as those in the developing world who either are feminine or who perform ritualistic “feminine” sexual behavior that may shock the average reader.
The conclusions to which Bailey came after years of psychological profiles, statistical studies, interviews, and comparison of his research with that [sic] fellow scientists, may not always be politically correct, but they are scientifically accurate, thoroughly researcher [sic], and occasionally startling. The Man Who Would Be Queen is a fresh and frank look at a compelling topic.
I’m also attaching a two-page document that lists what’s NEW AND CONTROVERSIAL about this book, a praise sheet, and a timeline of important moments intransgender history during the past 10 years.
(See attached file: controversial ideas.doc)
(See attached file: praise.doc ) [PDF file: requires reader]
(See attached file: timeline.doc) [PDF file: requires reader]
Bailey will be in Atlanta on Tuesday, April 8th. I’d love to arrange for him to do an in-studio interview while he’s there. If you can’t have him in-studio on the 8th, I hope you’ll consider having him do a phone interview at some point in the future after war coverage dies down.
The National Academies Press / Joseph Henry Press”
500 Fifth Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20001
Internet: www.nap.edu / www.jhpress.org
One of our investigators retrieved the three attached files mentioned in the message above and sent the following analysis:
What’s really important about these documents is one was written by Bailey, on his outdated little Mac, on December 3, 2002, one by Ann Merchant on January 13, 2003 with the tentative title “What sort of person devotes their life to the study of bugs?” (though that could be a vestige of the previous Word doc she was editing — to be fair to her), and Robin Pinnel’s own badly-distorted “timeline” (dated March 26, 2003) of what she considers milestones in transgender history for the past decade. These docs slipped under the radar by the way Pinnel had sent them as in-line uu-encoded attachments. I decoded all three and was able to open them directly in Microsoft Word and see all three authors stats and electronic signatures, as well as see their thinking in their own words before the book went to press.
I’m attaching all 3 original docs in this e-mail, as well as faithfully reproduced PDF’s I made to post on the web. Here’s the source I found, if anyone claims these aren’t authentic (http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-atlanta-audio/2003-April/000188.html). Lynn, maybe you can also see if other versions existed in that CIA Internet database you found a while back. These docs are very damning, and really show some of the backroom thinking that was going on. JHP and Bailey won’t be able to back away from their own words on what they “meant” and what they “intended” when it’s all right here in black and white!
“controversial ideas” by J. Michael Bailey
controversial ideas [PDF file: requires reader]