Academic intolerance
A new journal article by Alice Dreger(pdf) details the author's investigation into the harassment of Michael Bailey, the author of The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transexualism. From the abstract:
In 2003, psychology professor and sex researcher J. Michael Bailey published a book entitled The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism. The book’s portrayal of male-tofemale (MTF) transsexualism, based on a theory developed by sexologist Ray Blanchard, outraged some transgender activists. They believed the book to be typical of much of the biomedical literature on transsexuality—oppressive in both tone and claims, insulting to their senses of self, and damaging to their public identities. Some saw the book as especially dangerous because it claimed to be based on rigorous science, was published by an imprint of the National Academies of Science, and argued that MTF sex changes are motivated primarily by erotic interests and not by the problem of having the gender identity common to one sex in the body of the other. Dissatisfied with the option of merely criticizing the book, a small number of transwomen (particularly Lynn Conway, Andrea James, and Deirdre McCloskey) worked to try to ruin Bailey.(Via Seth Roberts.)
Bailey's book, as stated above, undermines what transsexuals would have everyone believe about their motives for sex change. Instead of a psychological mixup as to which sex they "really" belong to or identify with, Bailey's research argues that transsexuals get sexual thrills by imagining themselves as the opposite sex. And we can't have anyone questioning the purity of their motivations, so they set out to ruin Bailey academically, charging him with any number of academic violations. In particular, one of the harassers was Deirdre McCloskey, formerly Donald McCloskey, a well-known University of Illinois economics professor, one who can't handle the truth and waged a campaign against Bailey.
posted by Dennis Mangan @ 6:39 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
I am becoming of the opinion that academics are mostly not worth listening to. There are probably more academics than trans-sexual people, so you can imagine what I think there.
Perhaps the only really interesting thing here is the number of seemingly high achieving academic females who turn out to males who have mutilated themselves.
On page 18 of the document we find the following:
I think it is safe to say that few trans adults see their identities as a risk to be avoided, any more that most natal women see their identities this way, even though being a natal woman (like being a
transwoman) invariably comes with biological and social challenges.
And being being a natal male does not come with biological and social challenges?
Computer guru Lynn Conway put an obsessive amount of effort into smearing anybody who even gave Bailey's book a positive review.
Interesting. Bailey was a co-author of this paper: Parental Selection of Children's Sexual Orientation
It seems to suggest that parents, at least right thing ones :-), might want heterosexual children, and might be able to screen for them in the future or even ensure that whatever pathogens or intra-uterine hormonal imbalances might result in non-heterosexual offspring are guarded against.
We are starting our own Satire provided to us by Shirley Spammer.
For information about the Baileyesque figure in the Intersex community
http://www.intersexualite.org/AliceDreger.html
I feel that Dreger and Bailey deserve NO serious response from most of us at this point. What Dreger has done in my opinion is use her social status and her normborn privilege to caricature me and in so doing it has been crafted into a genetic definition of me as disordered sexually. This is a very dangerous caricature. What Shirley Spammer and Andrew Kerr have done in the following satire is simply mirror back what they are doing; but, of course, there is no real danger there because it is not to be taken seriously as a scientific, truthful article. What Dreger and Bailey have done is very serious and even though it is a caricature, a perversion of what I am, it will end the lives of many like me in the future because of having a DSD or more precisely: a genetic birth defect suitable to be eliminated from the gene pool.
Dreger and Bailey are the only ones with the TRUTH. All others are liars or erroneous. That ends the discussion. Freedom of expression only applies to the ones doing the research and speaking about us and for us - never to us the actual subjects. Like Sophie Siedlberg has so clearly pointed out, when we the subjects object, then the objection is the subject of another clinical study of the squeaks of the labrats. By accident of birth, we have no access to their Ubermensch truth. This is our disclaimer. We don't pretend to have the truth. Only those who speak for us do.
The first two in our series:
Professor Rike Mengele Fatbastard and Dr M. Alice Doormat De Vile Are Innocent!!
"When Professors are branded neo Nazi scum and liars"
Access to the articles in this series
http://www.intersexualite.org/AliceDreger.html#anchor_68
OII: The only people trying to stifle freedom of expression is you and your kind. Bailey and Dreger have never tried to silence anyone, and your putting the argument into terms of free speech is blatantly dishonest. It's *you* who want to muzzle your critics.
Post a Comment
<< Home