The NYT has an interesting story about J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern who authored a controversial book about the experiences of transgender women. At the heart of the controversy is his suggestion "that some people born male who want to cross genders are driven primarily by an erotic fascination with themselves as women. This idea runs counter to the belief, held by many men who decide to live as women, that they are the victims of a biological mistake — in essence, women trapped in men’s bodies."
He has been intensely scrutinized, criticized and in some cases harassed by both academics and activists in the transgender community for putting forth an idea that, from their perspective makes an inflammatory, unsubstantiated assertion about an already vulnerable and marginalized community.
After reading the article - which is admittedly only one source - I found Bailey's argument compelling: that he, after all, is doing what scientists do, exploring and testing ideas and explanations for phenomena we don't fully understand. His assertion isn't grounded in hard science, it is a proposition that at least deserves consideration and perhaps warrants further study. He has challenged both science and queer dogma; the latter, at least, can be a rigid environment in which such challenges are discouraged. While it may protect our community's short term interests to hold this stance, I don't think serves our longer term vision.
