Book Review: The Man Who Would Be Queen
by S. Alejandra Velasquez
Dr. Michael Bailey's
The Man Who Would Be Queen (tmwwbq for short) is about male
femininity and about the ways that male femininty may be expressed by
gay men, feminine gay boys and in mtf transsexuals, called homosexual
transsexuals, whose etiology groups them with gay boys. Dr. Bailey
believes that male homosexuality and femininity are correlational and
that there is a continuum of femininity in males starting with
masculine butch gay men and ending with gay boys incapable of
presenting convincingly as males, who become homosexual
transsexuals. These aren't really new ideas and tmwwbq is not a
scholarly work of original research, it's more like a new look at some
older ideas written in an accessable sympathetic style free of
unnecessary political correcteness.
The most interesting
and most controversial topic in tmwwbq is transsexuality and
especially the two types of mtf transsexuals. Dr. Bailey's book is the
first ever to explain clearly to a lay audience the differences
between homosexual transsexuals (hsts) and autogynephilic transsexuals
(agp). This typology isn't new either, it is based on the work of
psychologist Dr. Ray Blanchard who first described the two
transsexuals in a paper published in 1989. Dr. Blanchard's taxonomy
describes transsexuals who are feminine from a very young age,
unequivecably attracted to males and who "transition" and have surgery for
advantageous social reasons as homosexual transexuals; those who are
generally bi, heterosexual or asexual with a history of transvestism,
who transition and have surgery for intense personal reasons related to
their unusual sexuality are called autogynephilic. It's been well
known that there are two very different types of m2f transsexuals
since the word transsexual came into use but Dr. Blanchard's typology
explains the differences etiologically, motivationally and
behaviorly. Michael Bailey's book is unique, based on his friendships
and experiences with transsexuals of both types.
The Man Who Would Be Queen shows the differences between the
two types of transsexuals very clearly and that is one reason why
it is so upsetting to many transsexuals, but certainly not to all.
Most non-academic
books about transsexuality have been either transsexual
(auto)biographies or else they have portrayed transsexuals as
suffering from a condition of "gender identity". Transsexual biographies
have been with few exceptions about transsexuals who fit the
autogynephilic model such as Jan Morris Conundrum, Dierdre
McCloskey Crossings and Jennifer Boylan She's Not
There. Books about m2f transsexuals like gender therapist Mildred
Brown's True Selves have been oriented exclusively on explaining
transsexuality as a monolithic condition, a dilemma of feeling trapped in
the wrong physical gender (quoted from Amazon). Homosexual
transsexuals are not acknowleged or described realistically
in these books except as occassional supporting characters
reinterpreted in terms of the standard transsexual narratives
of being born in the wrong body and being motivationally asexual.
Real understanding of the lives and issues of homosexual transsexuals
is erased by these one sided portrayals. The Man Who Would Be
Queen is the first book to place homosexual transsexuals back into
the social dialog on transsexuality with accuracy and insight.
Michael Bailey gets a lot of things remarkabley right about hsts in
his book. It's really very refreshing to read something that has some
relevance and insight for once, compared to the endless books,
television appearances and websites by agp transsexuals which all
present exclusively one sided views. He is correct in understanding
that homosexual transsexuals are remarkably similar in many ways and
extremely homogenous in terms of their transsexuality and this holds
true across cultural and socio-economic lines (transkids.us members
come from all socio-economic backgrounds and are asian white and
latina for instance). Dr. Bailey understands that homosexual
transexuality is uncomplicated, a social problem involving social
identity and sexuality, not a problem of "inner gender identity". He
is correct that hsts and agp transsexuals very rarely even meet much
less form friendships but those of us who have met agp transsexuals
will probably recognize "Cher", who sees the difficult world at the
bottom of the social ladder of the hsts girls she wants to become
friends with as the "big leagues".
Some of the criticisms of tmwwbq seem somewhat amusing to hsts
transsexuals. For instance it really doesn't seem at all unusual or
objectifying for a straight male sexologist to write candidly about
the attractiveness of the hsts transgirls in his book, since this is
after all a major part of the decision process for homosexual
transsexuals who are motivated to make their lives more socially and
sexually meaningfull. People who have sexual attractions to other
people are always making assessments of attractiveness in others. It
seems like such an autogynephilic stance to complain that sexologists
should not be concerned with sexual attraction or that "changing sex"
has nothing to do with sexuality.
There's a lot of free conjecture in The Man Who Would Be Queen,
both by Michael Bailey, he simply calls them his hunches, and by some
of the sources he quotes. Transsexuality is a phenomenon which really
has not been very scientifically examined and most of the prevailing
ideas about transsexuals are more expressions of social class
relationships than they are well thought out and studied examinations
of human behavior. There's a lot to be speculative about and sometimes
Dr. Bailey's hunches or those of his sources seem quite insightful and
sometimes they seem more reflective of social attitudes than
insightful. It doesn't seem very useful for instance to try and
determine whether hsts transkids should be considered a good outcome
or a bad outcome. We have to make the best of the world we are born
into as the people we are and a humanistic society would simply allow
for a naturally occuring human variation like homosexual
transsexuality. It might seem paradoxical but a more accepting and
understanding society for feminine boys who might become hsts
teenagers would probably result in fewer transkids choosing transition
and surgery not more, and that would be good not because homosexual
transsexuality is a bad outcome but because it is a difficult one in
the world we live in. Poor Latino hsts transkids often "transition"
very young and this is not because Latinos have more transsexuality
than other ethinic groups but because Latino culture is not tolerant
at all of femininity in boys. A more understanding and accepting
society would give children and teenagers more choices and make
desperate behavior like running away at fourteen less common.
It's also not very insightfull to confuse the effects of the social
and familial difficulties which homosexual transsexuals must face,
often from very early childhood, with biological determinism which
might, for instance, define us as more willing to engage in
meaningless sex because we are biologically male. We would rather take
Dr.Bailey at his word, that he believes in the value of science and
research and encourage good research and understanding, not the
imposition of biological imperitives which unfairly characterize those
already at the very bottom rung of the social ladder.
Autogynephilic transsexuals have expressed rage both at the
publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen and at Michael Bailey
personally. That kind of unreasoned hatred does not come from people
who are upset about inaccurate portrayals or muddy classification schemes,
it comes from people who are facing the prospect of losing the
privileges which they have gained through social manipulation and
dishonesty. The problem with The Man Who Would Be Queen for
some transsexuals is not that there is so much wrong, but that there
is too much right.
Alejandra Velasquez
|
|
