The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism is a 2003 book by the American psychologist J. Michael Bailey, published by Joseph Henry Press.Bailey, J. Michael (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press (National Academies Press).
In the first section of the book, Bailey discusses gender-atypical behavior and gender dysphoria in children, emphasizing the biological determination of gender. In the second section, he deals primarily with gay men, including the link between childhood gender dysphoria and male homosexuality later in life. Bailey reviews evidence that male homosexuality is congenital (a result of genetics and prenatal environment), and he argues for the accuracy of some gay stereotypes.Bailey (2003), p. 76. In the third section, Bailey summarizes evidence for the Blanchard typology of transsexualism that claims there are two forms of transsexualism that affect transgender women: one as an extreme type of male homosexuality and one that is a sexual interest in having a female body, called autogynephilia.
The book caused considerable controversy, which led to complaints and a formal investigation by Northwestern University, where Bailey was chair of the psychology department until shortly before the investigation concluded. Northwestern ultimately found no basis for the complaints,Barlow, G. (December 17, 2003). "NU professor faces sexual allegations". Chicago Free Press. and a university spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship had nothing to do with the investigation. According to Bailey, some of his critics were motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about the autogynephilia theory of transgender women., Northwestern Chronicle, 10-09-2005
Summary The Man Who Would Be Queen is divided into three sections: "The Boy Who Would Be Princess", "The Man He Might Become", and "Women Who Once Were Boys".
It starts with an anecdote about a child Bailey calls "Danny". Bailey writes of Danny's mother, who has been frustrated by other therapists she has seen about her son's "feminine" behavior.Bailey (2003), p. 16. Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist Kenneth Zucker's work with children whose parents have noticed significant gender-atypical behaviors. Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to describe gender identity disorder, a label applied to males with significant feminine behaviors and females with significant masculine behaviors, such as cross-dressing. For example, this class includes boys that prefer to play with dolls and regularly identify with female characters in stories or movies, and girls that prefer to play with toy cars and identify with male characters. This section of the book also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, reassigned to the female sex shortly after their birth, and emphasizes the fact that, despite this, they tended to exhibit typically male characteristics and often identified as men.
The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood gender identity disorder and male homosexuality later in life. Bailey discusses whether homosexuality is a congenitally or possibly even genetically related phenomenon. This discussion includes references to Bailey's studies as well as those of neuroscientist Simon LeVay and geneticist Dean Hamer. He also discusses the behavior of gay men and its stereotypically masculine and feminine qualities.
In the third section, Bailey summarizes a taxonomy of trans women that was proposed by Ray Blanchard about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of trans women: one described as an "extreme form of male homosexuality", the other being motivated by a sexual interest in having a female body. Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs.
Reception The book elicited both strongly supportive and strongly negative reactions. The controversial aspects included the contents of the book, whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press, and whether it should have been promoted as a scientific work. According to Benedict Carey's story in The New York Times, "To many of Dr. Bailey's peers, his story is a morality play about the corrosive effects of political correctness on academic freedom." Interviewed by Carey, bioethicist Alice Dreger argues that "what happened to Bailey is important, because the harassment was so extraordinarily bad and because it could happen to any researcher in the field. If we're going to have research at all, then we're going to have people saying unpopular things, and if this is what happens to them, then we've got problems not only for science but free expression itself."
However, critics such as Deirdre McCloskey think that the pointed criticism, including filing charges, was warranted: "Nothing we have done, I believe, and certainly nothing I have done, overstepped any boundaries of fair comment on a book and an author who stepped into the public arena with enthusiasm to deliver a false and unscientific and politically damaging opinion". The concern over academic freedom was dismissed by Charles Allen Moser, who wrote: "The death of free speech and academic freedom has been highly exaggerated. Science is not free of politics, never has been, and never will be."
Positive reactions Kirkus Reviews concluded: "Despite its provocative title, a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition."The Man Who Would Be Queen via National Academies Press. Retrieved 6 September 2008. The book received praise from sexual behavior scientist Simon LeVay, from sex-differences expert David Buss, and from research psychologist Steven Pinker, who wrote: "The Man Who Would Be Queen may upset the guardians of political correctness on both the left and the right, but it will be welcomed by intellectually curious people of all sexes and sexual orientations."Pinker, Steven (June 28, 2003). Pages for pleasure. The Guardian It also received praise from Forbes magazine's Daniel SeligmanSeligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). Transsexuals And the Law. Forbes and from Mark Henderson at The Times.Henderson, Mark (December 6, 2003). Who's got the brains in this relationship? The Times Conservative commentator John Derbyshire said: "a wealth of fascinating information, carefully gathered by (it seems to me) a conscientious and trustworthy scientific observer."Derbyshire, John (June 30, 2003). Lost in the Male. National Review It also received a positive review from writer Ethan Boatner of Lavender magazine and Duncan Osborne in Out.Osborne, Duncan (March 2003). 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' (review). Out, March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 9, pp. 54–54. Research psychologist James Cantor also wrote a positive review of the book in the newsletter of APA's Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues (Division 44).Cantor, James M. (2003) BOOK REVIEW: "The Man Who Would Be Queen by J. Michael Bailey, The National Academies Press, 2003. ", APA Division 44 Newsletter 19(2): 6. Alice Dreger, Northwestern University professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics, also praised the book, stating that "plenty of gay and transgender people" who had read the book saw it as accurate and "wonderfully supportive of LGBT people".
In December 2003, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reported that many of the early supporters of Bailey's book, including Ray Blanchard, were members of the Human Biodiversity Institute.
Negative reactions The public response of members of the transgender community was almost entirely negative. Among other things, they opposed the book's endorsement of Blanchard's taxonomy of male-to-female transsexualism,Klein, Julie M. (May 2004). Ethical minefields: The sex that would be science. Seed Magazine, May/June 2004 and its publication by the National Academies Press, by whom it was "advertised as science"Krasny, Michael (August 22, 2007). Transgender Theories. Forum with Michael Krasny, KQED and marketed as "scientifically accurate," which they argued was untrue. They also claimed the book exploited children with gender dysphoria.Carey, Benedict (August 21, 2007). "Criticism of a Gender Theory, and a Scientist Under Siege". The New York Times. Retrieved September 19, 2007. Among those criticizing the book were computer scientist Lynn Conway,Marcus, Jon (August 1, 2003). Transsexuals Protest. Times Higher Education, p. 13 biologists Joan RoughgardenRoughgarden, Joan (June 4, 2004). "Twist In The Tale Of Two Genders". Times Higher Education. No. 1643, p. 20. and Ben Barres,Holden, Constance (July 18, 2003). Transsexuality Treatise Triggers Furor., Science/AAAS) mirrored at physician Rebecca Allison,Staff report (June 25, 2003). Trans Group Attacks New Book on 'Queens.' Windy City Times economist Deirdre McCloskey,McCloskey, Deirdre (November 2003). Queer Science: A data-bending psychologist confirms what he already knew about gays and transsexuals. Reason, November 2003 psychologist Madeline Wyndzen, writers Dallas Denny,Denny, Dallas (December 13, 2004). Viewpoint: Why the Bailey Controversy Is Important. Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004 Pauline Park,Park, Pauline (May 30, 2003). Sympathy, But Finding Pathology. Gay City News Jamison Green,Green J (2003). Bailey's wick. PlanetOut and Andrea James,Surkan, K (2007). Transsexuals Protest Academic Exploitation. In Lillian Faderman, Yolanda Retter, Horacio Roque Ramírez, eds. Great Events From History: Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Events, 1848–2006. pages 111–114. Salem Press as well as Christine Burns of Press for Change, and Executive Director Monica Casper of the Intersex Society of North America.The Ups and Downs of J. Michael Bailey. Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004, pp. 53–54. James, a transgender advocate, attacked Bailey by constructing a website with pictures of Bailey's children taken from his public website beside sexually explicit captions, apparently as a critique of Bailey's descriptions of transsexual children in his book.
Negative responses also came from outside the transgender community. Liza Mundy of The Washington Post thought the book was exceptionally dull despite the potentially interesting topic.Mundy, Liza (March 23, 2003). Codes of Behavior. Washington Post Sexologist Eli Coleman referred to the book as "an unfortunate setback in feelings of trust between the transgender community and sex researchers". Eli Coleman was then President of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (World Professional Association for Transgender Health). In response to the criticism, Ray Blanchard resigned from his position at HBIGDA on November 4, 2003.
Eli Coleman's colleague, Walter Bockting, wrote that it was "yet another blow to the delicate relationship between clinicians, scholars, and the transgender community." Kinsey Institute Director John Bancroft said the book promoted a derogatory explanation of transgender identity that would hurt many vulnerable transgender people, and that the book, which was written in a popular science style, did not support the material in a scientific manner. Psychologist Randi Ettner said of Bailey, "He's set back the field 100 years, as far as I'm concerned."
The Man Who Would Be Queen was originally one of the finalists for the Lambda Literary Award for the "transgender" category. However, after judicial review, the book was determined to be "transphobic" and "not appropriate for the category", so it was removed from consideration.
Allegations of malpractice