[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

The Man Who Would Be Queen: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Academic freedom: "Said" and "wrote", not fancy words. Rm non-ref and misplaced ref; trim quote (cute, but off-topic).
cleared up language
Line 17: Line 17:
| preceded_by =
| preceded_by =
| followed_by =
| followed_by =
}}'''''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''''' is a 2003 book by [[J. Michael Bailey]], published by [[Joseph Henry Press]].<ref name="jhp">Bailey, J. Michael (2003). ''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''. Joesph Henry Press, ISBN 978-0309084185</ref> Bailey reviews evidence that male [[homosexuality]] is congenital (a result of heredity and prenatal environment), and he argues for "the accuracy of some [[stereotype]]s about gay men."<ref name="Bailey76">Bailey (2003), p. 76.</ref> He also reviews evidence for a [[taxonomy]] that says there are two forms of [[transsexualism]] in males, one that is an extreme type of homosexuality and one that is an expression of a [[paraphilia]] known as [[autogynephilia]].
}}'''''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''''' is a 2003 book by [[J. Michael Bailey]], published by [[Joseph Henry Press]].<ref name="jhp">Bailey, J. Michael (2003). ''The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism''. Joesph Henry Press, ISBN 978-0309084185</ref> Bailey reviews evidence that male [[homosexuality]] is congenital (a result of heredity and prenatal environment), and he argues for "the accuracy of some [[stereotype]]s about gay men."<ref name="Bailey76">Bailey (2003), p. 76.</ref> He also reviews evidence for a [[taxonomy]] that says there are two forms of [[transsexualism]] in [[transsexual women|transwoman]], one that is what is described as an extreme type of homosexuality and one that is an expression of a [[paraphilia]] known as [[autogynephilia]].


The book caused considerable controversy which led to a formal investigation by [[Northwestern University]], where Bailey was Chair of the Psychology Department until shortly before the conclusion of the investigation. A Northwestern University spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship was not linked to the investigation.<ref>{{cite web |author=Davis, Andrew|url=http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=6810|title= Northwestern Sex Researcher Investigated, Results Unknown|publisher= ''Windy City Times''|date=[[December 8]], 2004 |quote=Bailey resigned as chairman of the university's psychology department in October, Alan K. Cubbage, a Northwestern spokesman, told the ''Chronicle.'' Cubbage added that the change had nothing to do with the investigation. Bailey remains a full professor at the university.}}</ref> Bailey insists that criticism of him was motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about autogynephilia theory on transsexuals,<ref name="McCarthyism">{{cite web | title = Academic McCarthyism | url=http://web.archive.org/web/20070807075502/http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 | accessdate = 2008-07-27 }}</ref> though others reject this assessment.<ref name=Moser/>
The book caused considerable controversy which led to a formal investigation by [[Northwestern University]], where Bailey was Chair of the Psychology Department until shortly before the conclusion of the investigation. A Northwestern University spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship was not linked to the investigation.<ref>{{cite web |author=Davis, Andrew|url=http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=6810|title= Northwestern Sex Researcher Investigated, Results Unknown|publisher= ''Windy City Times''|date=[[December 8]], 2004 |quote=Bailey resigned as chairman of the university's psychology department in October, Alan K. Cubbage, a Northwestern spokesman, told the ''Chronicle.'' Cubbage added that the change had nothing to do with the investigation. Bailey remains a full professor at the university.}}</ref> Bailey insists that criticism of him was motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about autogynephilia theory on transsexuals,<ref name="McCarthyism">{{cite web | title = Academic McCarthyism | url=http://web.archive.org/web/20070807075502/http://www.chron.org/tools/viewarticle.php?artid=1248 | accessdate = 2008-07-27 }}</ref> though others reject this assessment.<ref name=Moser/>
Line 25: Line 25:
''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''.
''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: "In spring of 1996 Leslie Ryan came to my Northwestern University office to seek yet another opinion."<ref name="bailey16">Bailey (2003), p. 16.</ref> Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist [[Kenneth Zucker]]'s work with boys who have a [[mental disorder]] called [[gender identity disorder]] (GID). Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to discuss young boys considered to have GID. This term is used to describe patients who exhibit a large amount of salient [[gender]]-atypical behavior such as [[cross-dressing]], preferring to play with dolls, identification with female characters in stories or movies. This section also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, [[sex assignment|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 a desire to identify as a male.
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 daughter's feminine behavior: "In spring of 1996 Leslie Ryan came to my Northwestern University office to seek yet another opinion."<ref name="bailey16">Bailey (2003), p. 16.</ref> Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist [[Kenneth Zucker]]'s work with young transsexual girls. Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to discuss young transsexual girls considered to have Gender Identity Disorder. This term is used to describe patients who exhibit a large amount of salient [[gender]]-atypical behavior such as [[cross-dressing]] (or gender-typical as related to the gender they identify with), preferring to play with dolls, identification with female characters in stories or movies. This section also discusses some case studies of men who were, for varying reasons, [[sex assignment|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 a desire to identify as a male.


The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood GID 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.
The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood GID 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 male-to-female transsexualism that was proposed by [[Ray Blanchard]] about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of male-to-female transsexualism: one is an extreme form of male homosexuality, and the other is motivated by [[autogynephilia|an erotic interest in being female]].<ref>Blanchard, R., Clemmensen, L. J., & Steiner, B. W. (1987). Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16,'' 139–152.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria. ''Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 177,'' 616–623.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18,'' 315–334.</ref> Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs.
In the third section, Bailey summarizes a taxonomy of transsexual women that was proposed by [[Ray Blanchard]] about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of transsexual women: one is described as a supposedly extreme form of male homosexuality, and the other being motivated by [[autogynephilia|a sexual interest in having a female body]].<ref>Blanchard, R., Clemmensen, L. J., & Steiner, B. W. (1987). Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16,'' 139–152.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria. ''Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 177,'' 616–623.</ref><ref>Blanchard, R. (1989). The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias. ''Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18,'' 315–334.</ref> Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs.


On the last page of the book, Bailey meets "Danny," who no longer has gender identity disorder.
On the last page of the book, Bailey meets "Danny," who no longer has gender identity disorder.


==Controversy==
==Controversy==
The book elicited both strongly positive and strongly negative responses. Among the controversial aspects were not only the contents of the book, but whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press and promoted as scientific, and even the implications for academic freedom when critics react strongly against the publication of controversial or unpopular views.
The book elicited both mostly strongly negative responses, also with a few strongly supporting reactions. Among the controversial aspects were not only the contents of the book, but whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press and promoted as scientific, and even the implications for academic freedom when critics react strongly against the publication of controversial or unpopular views.


===Positive reactions===
===Positive reactions===

Revision as of 01:56, 26 June 2009

"The Man Who Would Be Queen"
Controversial dust jacket.
Controversial dust jacket.
AuthorJ. Michael Bailey
LanguageEnglish
GenrePopular science
PublisherJoseph Henry Press imprint of the National Academies Press
Publication date
2003
Publication placeUnited States of America
Media typePrint (Hardback & ebook PDF
Pages256
ISBN9780309084185

The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism is a 2003 book by J. Michael Bailey, published by Joseph Henry Press.[1] Bailey reviews evidence that male homosexuality is congenital (a result of heredity and prenatal environment), and he argues for "the accuracy of some stereotypes about gay men."[2] He also reviews evidence for a taxonomy that says there are two forms of transsexualism in transwoman, one that is what is described as an extreme type of homosexuality and one that is an expression of a paraphilia known as autogynephilia.

The book caused considerable controversy which led to a formal investigation by Northwestern University, where Bailey was Chair of the Psychology Department until shortly before the conclusion of the investigation. A Northwestern University spokesperson said that his departure from the department chairmanship was not linked to the investigation.[3] Bailey insists that criticism of him was motivated by a desire to suppress discussion of the book's ideas about autogynephilia theory on transsexuals,[4] though others reject this assessment.[5]

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 daughter's feminine behavior: "In spring of 1996 Leslie Ryan came to my Northwestern University office to seek yet another opinion."[6] Bailey discusses psychologist and sexologist Kenneth Zucker's work with young transsexual girls. Bailey uses the anecdote about Danny to discuss young transsexual girls considered to have Gender Identity Disorder. This term is used to describe patients who exhibit a large amount of salient gender-atypical behavior such as cross-dressing (or gender-typical as related to the gender they identify with), preferring to play with dolls, identification with female characters in stories or movies. This section 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 a desire to identify as a male.

The second section deals primarily with gay men, including a suggested link between childhood GID 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 transsexual women that was proposed by Ray Blanchard about fifteen years earlier. According to Blanchard, there are two types of transsexual women: one is described as a supposedly extreme form of male homosexuality, and the other being motivated by a sexual interest in having a female body.[7][8][9] Bailey also discusses the process by which transition from male to female occurs.

On the last page of the book, Bailey meets "Danny," who no longer has gender identity disorder.

Controversy

The book elicited both mostly strongly negative responses, also with a few strongly supporting reactions. Among the controversial aspects were not only the contents of the book, but whether the research was conducted ethically, whether it should have been published by the National Academies Press and promoted as scientific, and even the implications for academic freedom when critics react strongly against the publication of controversial or unpopular views.

Positive reactions

Kirkus Reviews concluded: "Despite its provocative title, a scientific yet superbly compassionate exposition."[10] The book received praise from gay sexual behavior scientist Simon LeVay,[10] from sex-differences expert David Buss,[11] and from research psychologist Steven Pinker, who wrote: "With a mixture of science, humanity, and fine writing, J. Michael Bailey illuminates the mysteries of sexual orientation and identity in the best book yet written on the subject. 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. A truly fascinating book."[12][13] It also received praise from journalists John Derbyshire,[14] Steve Sailer,[10] Daniel Seligman,[15] and Mark Henderson.[16] For example, conservative commentator John Derbyshire said that matters of sexual eccentricity are "at the very crux of conservative thinking as it has developed in this country across the past half-century," and praises the book for offering "a wealth of fascinating information, carefully gathered by (it seems to me) a conscientious and trustworthy scientific observer."[14]

Some reviews in the LGBT press were positive, such as from writers Ethan Boatner[10] for Lavender Magazine and Duncan Osborne for Out.[17] Those in the transgender community who agreed with Blanchard's taxonomy also reviewed the book positively. Anne Lawrence, a physician and sexologist whose work on autogynephilia is featured in the book, wrote "This is a wonderful book on an important subject,"[10] and autogynephilia support group founder Willow Arune wrote, "Blanchard, Bailey, Lawrence and [Blanchard colleague Maxine] Petersen have done more to help transsexuals over years of service than perhaps any other four people in the world."[18]

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,[19] and its publication by the National Academies Press, by whom it was "advertised as science"[20] and marketed as "scientifically accurate,"[21] which they argued was untrue. They also claimed the book exploited children with gender dysphoria.[22] Among those criticizing the book were computer scientist Lynn Conway,[23] biologists Joan Roughgarden[21] and Ben Barres,[24] physician Rebecca Allison,[25] economist Deirdre McCloskey,[26] psychologist Madeline Wyndzen,[27] writers Dallas Denny,[28] Pauline Park,[29] Jamison Green,[30] Gwen Smith,[31] and Andrea James,[32] as well as Christine Burns of Press for Change, Karen Gurney of the Australian W-O-M-A-N Network, and Executive Director Monica Casper of the Intersex Society of North America.[33]

Negative responses came from outside the transgender community as well. Liza Mundy of the Washington Post thought the book exceptionally dull despite the potentially interesting topic.[34] Psychologist Eli Coleman referred to the book as "an unfortunate setback in feelings of trust between the transgender community and sex researchers,"[11] and his colleague, Walter Bockting, wrote that it was "yet another blow to the delicate relationship between clinicians, scholars, and the transgender community."[35] Kinsey Institute Director John Bancroft referred to the book as "not science," later clarifying that "it promoted a very derogatory explanation of transgender identity which most TG people would find extremely hurtful and humiliating….Whether based on science or not we have a responsibility to present scientific ideas, particularly in the public arena, in ways which are not blatantly hurtful. But in addition to that, [Bailey] did not support his analysis in a scientific manner—hence my comment."[11] Psychologist Randi Ettner said of Bailey, "He's set back the field 100 years, as far as I'm concerned."[19]

Originally, the Lambda Literary Foundation nominated the book as a finalist in the transgender award category for 2003. Transpeople immediately protested the nomination and gathered thousands of petition signatures in just a few days. Under pressure from the petition, LLF's judges examined the book more closely, decided that it was transphobic, and removed it from their list of finalists.[36]

Andrea James, a transgender advocate , attacked Bailey by constructing a page of "satire" by taking pictures of Bailey's children from his public website, and placing sexually offensive captions taken from Baileys book beside them.[22] James has said that she was echoing the disrespect that Bailey's work shows for vulnerable people, including children. [citation needed] "

Charges against Bailey

Two of the transsexual persons in Bailey's book and several organizations have accused him of ethical breaches in his work,[37] though Bailey has denied that he behaved unethically.[4] According to Northwestern University professor of clinical medical humanities and bioethics Alice Dreger, whether federal regulations required professors to obtain formal approval from a university Institutional Review Board (IRB) before interviewing people was uncertain at the time; she points out that shortly after publication of this book, the US Department of Health and Human Services, in conjunction with the Oral History Association and American Historical Association, issued a formal statement that taking oral histories, conducting interviews, collecting anecdotes, and similar activities do not constitute IRB-qualified research, and were never intended to be covered by clinical research rules, when such work is "neither systematic nor generalizable in the scientific sense."[11][38]

Academic freedom

New York Times reporter Benedict Carey wrote, "To many of Dr. Bailey’s peers, his story is a morality play about the corrosive effects of political correctness on academic freedom."[22] Bailey called the two years following the publication of his book "the hardest of my life."[22] Dreger said, "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."[22]

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”.[22] Dreger's conclusions[11] were criticized in some of the twenty-three peer commentaries published in the same issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior.[39] For example, Charles Moser 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. The origins of transsexuality are still not known and the concept of Autogynephilia is still controversial".[5]

There have been other similar controversies over academic figures expressing unpopular views. Lawrence Summers, while president of Harvard, commented that there might be intrinsic differences between men and women in terms of talent for science and math, and got considerable public backlash.[40] The critics were in turn accused of attempting to suppress academic freedom.[41] William Shockley expressed beliefs that reproductive rates among lower-IQ blacks was cause for concern, and was strongly criticized for this stand.[42] Again, this raised issues of whether criticism of such views was suppressing academic freedom.[43]

References

  1. ^ Bailey, J. Michael (2003). The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. Joesph Henry Press, ISBN 978-0309084185
  2. ^ Bailey (2003), p. 76.
  3. ^ Davis, Andrew (December 8, 2004). "Northwestern Sex Researcher Investigated, Results Unknown". Windy City Times. Bailey resigned as chairman of the university's psychology department in October, Alan K. Cubbage, a Northwestern spokesman, told the Chronicle. Cubbage added that the change had nothing to do with the investigation. Bailey remains a full professor at the university. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  4. ^ a b "Academic McCarthyism". Retrieved 2008-07-27. Cite error: The named reference "McCarthyism" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  5. ^ a b Charles Moser (2008). "A Different Perspective". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 37 (3). {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  6. ^ Bailey (2003), p. 16.
  7. ^ Blanchard, R., Clemmensen, L. J., & Steiner, B. W. (1987). Heterosexual and homosexual gender dysphoria. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16, 139–152.
  8. ^ Blanchard, R. (1989). The concept of autogynephilia and the typology of male gender dysphoria. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 177, 616–623.
  9. ^ Blanchard, R. (1989). The classification and labelling of nonhomosexual gender dysphorias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18, 315–334.
  10. ^ a b c d e The Man Who Would Be Queen via National Academies Press. Retrieved 6 September 2008.
  11. ^ a b c d e 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" (PDF). Arch Sex Behav. 37 (3): 366–421. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9301-1. PMID 18431641. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  12. ^ "The Man Who Would Be Queen: Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism". Catalog. The National Academies Press. Retrieved 2009-02-21.
  13. ^ Pinker, Steven (June 28, 2003). Pages for pleasure. The Guardian
  14. ^ a b Derbyshire, John (June 30, 2003). Lost in the Male. National Review
  15. ^ Seligman, Dan (October 13, 2003). Transsexuals And the Law. Forbes
  16. ^ Henderson, Mark (December 6, 2003). Who’s got the brains in this relationship? The Times
  17. ^ Osborne, Duncan (March 2003). 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' (review). Out, March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 9, pp. 54-54.
  18. ^ Arune, Willow (2004). I *AM* Arune! Transgender Tapestry 1(85):65–68.
  19. ^ a b Klein, Julie M. (May 2004). Ethical minefields: The sex that would be science. Seed Magazine, May/June 2004 Cite error: The named reference "klein2004" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  20. ^ Krasny, Michael (Aug 22, 2007). Transgender Theories. Forum with Michael Krasny, KQED
  21. ^ a b Roughgarden, Joan (June 4, 2004). Twist In The Tale Of Two Genders. Times Higher Education No.1643; Pg. 20
  22. ^ a b c d e f Carey, Benedict. (2007-08-21.) "Criticism of a Gender Theory, and a Scientist Under Siege." New York Times via nytimes.com. Retrieved on 2007-09-19.
  23. ^ Marcus, Jon (August 1, 2003). Transsexuals Protest. Times Higher Education, p. 13
  24. ^ Holden, Constance (July 18, 2003). Transsexuality Treatise Triggers Furor. ScienceNOW/Science (AAAS)
  25. ^ Staff report (June 25, 2003). Trans Group Attacks New Book on 'Queens.' Windy City Times
  26. ^ McCloskey, Deirdre (November 2003). Queer Science: A data-bending psychologist confirms what he already knew about gays and transsexuals. Reason, November 2003
  27. ^ James, Andrea (Fall 2006). A Defining Moment in Our History. Transgender Tapestry, Fall 2006, Issue 110, pp. 18-23.
  28. ^ Denny, Dallas (December 13, 2004). Viewpoint: Why the Bailey Controversy Is Important. Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004
  29. ^ Park, Pauline (May 30, 2003). Sympathy, But Finding Pathology. Gay City News
  30. ^ Green J (2003). Bailey’s wick. PlanetOut
  31. ^ Smith, Gwen (June 13, 2003). Not a man. Southern Voice
  32. ^ 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 ISBN 978-1-58765-263-9
  33. ^ The Ups and Downs of J. Michael Bailey. Transgender Tapestry #104, Winter 2004, pp. 53-54.
  34. ^ Mundy, Liza (March 23, 2003). Codes of Behavior. Washington Post
  35. ^ Bockting, Walter O. (2005). Biological reductionism meets gender diversity in human sexuality. [Review of the book The Man Who Would Be Queen.] Journal of Sex Research, 42, 267-270.
  36. ^ Letellier, Patrick (2004-03-16). "Group rescinds honor for disputed book". gay.com. Retrieved 2007-03-16.
  37. ^ Wilson, Robin. "Transsexual 'Subjects' Complain About Professor's Research Methods." The Chronicle of Higher Education 25 July 2003, Vol. 49, Issue 46. "The book contains numerous observations and reports of interviews with me," C. Anjelica Kieltyka, one of the transsexual women, wrote in a letter this month to C. Bradley Moore, Northwestern's vice president for research. She added: "I did not receive, nor was I asked to sign, an informed-consent document."
  38. ^ Ritchie, Don; Shopes, Linda (2003), Oral History Excluded from IRB Review: Application of the Department of Health and Human Services Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects at 45 CFR Part 46, Subpart A to Oral History Interviewing, Oral History Association, retrieved 31 December 2008. See also An Update on the Exclusion of Oral History from IRB Review (March 2004).
  39. ^ Archives of Sexual Behavior, volume 37, special section: commentaries on "controversial paper", pp. 422–510.
  40. ^ Summer's Remarks on Women Draw Fire
  41. ^ Stephan Thernstrom. "In Defense of Academic Freedom at Harvard". History News Network, George Mason University.
  42. ^ William B. Shockley, 79, Creator Of Transistor and Theory on Race
  43. ^ Kilgore, William J.; Sullivan, Barbara (1975). "Academic Values and the Jensen–Shockley Controversy". Journal of General Education.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Man_Who_Would_Be_Queen&oldid=298669676"