A further assessment of Blanchard's typology of homosexual versus non-homosexual or autogynephilic gender dysphoria

In a series of important but now highly controversial articles, Blanchard examined associations of sexual orientation and transvestic fetishism among male-to-female (MTF) transgender persons in Toronto, Canada. Transvestic fetishism was rare among the homosexuals but prevalent among the non-homosexuals. Subtypes of non-homosexual MTFs (heterosexual, bisexual, and asexual) were consistently high with regard to transvestic fetishism. Non-linear associations of a continuous measurement of sexual attraction to women (gynephilia) and transvestic fetishism were interpreted in terms of an etiological hypothesis in which transvestic fetishism interferes with the early development of heterosexuality. Blanchard concluded that homosexual versus non-homosexual sexual orientation is a dominant and etiologically significant axis for evaluating and understanding this population. We further assessed these findings among 571 MTFs from the New York City metropolitan area. Using the Life Chart Interview, multiple measurements of transvestic fetishism were obtained and classified as lifetime, lifecourse persistent, adolescent limited, and adult onset. Large (but not deterministic) differences in lifetime, lifecourse persistent, and adolescent limited transvestic fetishism were found between the homosexuals and non-homosexuals. Contrary to Blanchard, differences in transvestic fetishism were observed across subtypes of the non-homosexuals, and linear (not curvilinear) associations were found along a continuous measurement of gynephilia and transvestic fetishism. Age and ethnicity, in addition to sexual orientation, were found to be statistically significant predictors of transvestic fetishism. The clinical, etiological, and sociopolitical implications of these findings are discussed.

The controversy surrounding "The man who would be queen": a case history of the politics of science, identity, and sex in the Internet age

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-to-female (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 Academy of Sciences, 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. Using published and unpublished sources as well as original interviews, this essay traces the history of the backlash against Bailey and his book. It also provides a thorough exegesis of the book's treatment of transsexuality and includes a comprehensive investigation of the merit of the charges made against Bailey that he had behaved unethically, immorally, and illegally in the production of his book. The essay closes with an epilogue that explores what has happened since 2003 to the central ideas and major players in the controversy.