J. Michael Bailey

[[File:J. Michael Bailey.jpg|thumb|right|165px|Bailey in 2015]]
{{books|1}}
{{gender}}
'''John Michael Bailey''' {{lived|1957}} is a professor of [[psychology]] at Northwestern University. He is best known for his research on sexual orientation and for writing the [[pop science]] book '''''The Man Who Would Be Queen''''' in 2003, promoting [[Ray Blanchard]]'s [[Autogynephilia|taxonomy]] of male-to-female [[transsexualism]]. He was also the subject of a controversy in 2011 after he allowed a guest speaker to penetrate a naked woman with a mechanical [[sex toy]] in front of his class (deemed "Fucksaw-gate" or "The 'Fucksaw' Incident"), for which the university cancelled his human sexuality course.<ref>Jodi S. Cohen and Lisa Black (March 3, 2011). [https://web.archive.org/web/20130512110508/http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-northwestern-president-criticizes-sextoy-demonstration-20110303,0,7493639.story "NU president 'troubled' by sex toy demonstration on campus"]. ''The Chicago Tribune''.</ref><ref>Paul Schrodt (March 10, 2011). [https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a9575/northwestern-university-sex-5376740/ "What's Wrong with a Little Sex?"]. ''Esquire''.</ref>

==''The Man Who Would Be Queen''==
Bailey's magnum opus is divided into three sections, the first of which deals with [[gender dysphoria]] in children and the second of which discusses effeminacy in [[cross-dressing|cross-dressers]] and [[homosexual]] men. The third section details Bailey's conclusions about male-to-female transsexual individuals and generated a great deal of controversy.

Though he later distanced himself from Bailey's scientific certainty, Ray Blanchard sees his 1980s-era studies of [[male]]-to-[[female]] transsexuals reiterated in the book. Specifically, Bailey asserts that there are two types of natal males who seek sex reassignment:

# Extremely effeminate individuals, who are really very gay men who transition for the purpose of being more sexually appealing to men; and
# Older, less effeminate [[autogynephilia|autogynephiles]], who transition because they have an overpowering fetish for having a [[female]] body.

Bailey also claims trans women attracted to men are often [[prostitute]]s or thieves (and that this is sexually motivated), and that they're more attractive than trans women attracted to women.<ref name="the2004">(May 28, 2004). [http://archive.today/2024.03.24-212457/https://www.timeshighereducation.com/books/lots-of-sex-but-a-lack-of-science/189033.article "Lots of sex but a lack of science"]. ''Times Higher Education''.</ref><ref>Élise Hendrick. [https://www.transadvocate.com/science-and-ideology-the-blanchard-bailey-lawrence-model-of-transsexuality_n_162.htm "Science and Ideology: The Blanchard-Bailey-Lawrence Model of Transsexuality"]. ''TransAdvocate''.</ref><ref name="TMWWBQ"/>{{rp|184–185}} The book claims there are a "large number of Latina transsexuals", adding that "60 percent of the homosexual transsexuals and drag queens we studied were Latina or black." Bailey then includes speculation from a Latina trans woman that "[[Hispanic]] people might have more transsexual [[gene]]s than other ethnic groups do", to which Bailey says he's "not sure" about this theory.<ref name="the2004"/><ref name="TMWWBQ">{{Cite book |last=Bailey |first=J. Michael |url=http://archive.org/details/manwhowouldbeque00bail |title=The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism |date=2003 |publisher=Joseph Henry Press |isbn=978-0-309-08418-5}}</ref>{{rp|183–184}}

The book generated considerable controversy, receiving a complaint from a transgender student. Some professors complained that Bailey's work was unscientific, defamatory and dangerous to the social progress of the [[transgender|trans]] community. Several of Bailey's research subjects filed complaints of misconduct,<ref>[http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/ThirdComplaint.html Third Complaint Against Bailey]</ref> and an investigation took place that did not find anything so egregious that the university felt compelled to remove him from his post.

The ferocity and extent of the criticism caused Bailey and his defenders to cry persecution and that academic freedom was at risk, despite the fact that no censorship was ever attempted and the book was published by a major academic press. In defense of his writing, Bailey cited the fact that he was an ally of the LGBT community in an elaborate [[friend argument]]. However, a small number of people, especially Andrea James but also Lynn Conway, Deidre McCloskey, and a few others, unambiguously went ''way'' too far and engaged in outright harassment of both Bailey and anyone who they believed (whether or not it was actually true) had some positive association with him at any point in the past. James' response was to create a page on her website with sexually explicit captions on photos of his school-aged children, as if they had anything to do with it.<ref>Alice D. Dreger, [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170124/?tool=pmcentrez The Controversy Surrounding ''The Man Who Would Be Queen'': A Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age]. Arch Sex Behav. 2008 Jun; 37(3): 366–421, via National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information.</ref> These captions literally employed the same descriptions he used in his book for gender-nonconforming children, such as "cock-starved exhibitionist", in order to demonstrate their utterly offensive and dehumanizing nature and reflect them back to him. In turn, as James points out,<ref>[http://boingboing.net/2015/06/11/sexologys-war-on-transgender.html Boing Boing: Sexology's war on transgender children]</ref> colleague and ally Alice Dreger, in publishing a book with the title ''Galileo's Middle Finger'', resorted to the tired old [[Galileo gambit]] to defend Bailey, even though he does not suffer any noticeable academic repercussions, and despite troubling open questions, especially about the Danny Ryan case.

In 2018, Natalie Wynn, better known as [[Contrapoints]], discussed and criticized the concept of autogynephilia in a lengthly YouTube video.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6czRFLs5JQo Autogynephilia], Contrapoints (2018) ''Youtube.com''</ref>

Indeed, the majority of ethical researchers<ref>[http://juliaserano.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-real-autogynephilia-deniers.html The Real Autogynephilai Deniers]</ref> and trans individuals consider autogynephilia to be pseudoscience and even a form of transphobic character assassination<ref>[https://medium.com/@SiobhanFTB/content-notice-trans-antagonistic-nonsense-of-many-varieties-aed21c07b1f9 Trans-antagonistic nonsense of many varieties.]</ref> which relies almost exclusively on the assumption that the vast majority of trans individuals lie about their feelings and experiences. Indeed, Moser found that by Blanchard's criteria, 93% of cis women were also 'autogynephilic fetishists'.<ref>[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26660017_Autogynephilia_in_Women Autogynephilia in Women]</ref>

== Sexual orientation ==
Bailey is best known among scientists for his work on the cause of sexual orientation, with an early focus on twins, from which he concluded that homosexuality is substantially inherited. Bailey further believes social environmental factors as a cause for homosexuality are generally weak in magnitude and distorted by numerous confounding factors. Prompted by Uganda's proposed death penalty for homosexuality, Bailey authored a large academic review with five other scientists about the current evidence on the cause of non-heterosexuality in 2016.<ref>[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100616637616?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed# "Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science"] Bailey JM, Vasey PL, Diamond LM, Breedlove SM, Vilain E, Epprecht M (2016). Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 17 (2): 45–101.</ref>

===Bisexual men===

In 2005, Bailey co-authored a study measuring arousal responses of bisexual men which found the vast majority had a homosexual arousal pattern, leading Bailey to conclude that male bisexuality is rare and that most are gay men in denial.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/health/straight-gay-or-lying-bisexuality-revisited.html Gay Straight or Lying]</ref> This study was met with criticism.<ref>Loraine Hutchins, [http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Bisexuality/American%20Sexuality/American%20Sexuality%20magazine%20-%20The%20erasure%20of%20bisexuals.htm Sexual Prejudice: The erasure of bisexuals in academia and the media]. American Sexuality magazine, Volume 3, Number 4.</ref> Later in 2005, Bailey was approached by John Sylla, President of the [[American Institute of Bisexuality]] (AIB) who was critical of Bailey's original study. Sylla encouraged Bailey to test other bisexual males which led Bailey's lab to eventually find bisexual arousal responses in 2013-14.<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20201108091335/http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/magazine/the-scientific-quest-to-prove-bisexuality-exists.html The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists] The New York Times (2014)</ref> In 2020, Bailey co-authored a large study which found "robust evidence for bisexual orientation among men".<ref>[https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/07/14/2003631117 Robust evidence for bisexual orientation among men]</ref> Bailey's views on male bisexuality have been criticized namely for perpetuating stigma about bisexuals as liars or to insinuate that they require a laboratory test to prove their sexuality.<ref>https://twitter.com/profjmb/status/1285612047061987328 (see tweet responses)</ref> Bailey has defended his doubts about the existence of true male bisexuality because many gay men initially come out as bisexual and will later admit they are really gay,<ref>https://twitter.com/profjmb/status/1285612250993131520?s=20</ref> and argues that he tries "to do good science".<ref>Michael Bailey, [https://www.queermajority.com/essays-all/questioning-sexual-identities Questioning Sexual Identities]. Queer Majorities.</ref>

===Bisexual women===

Bailey inaccurately<ref>[https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Cultural-Competency/Mental-Health-Disparities/Mental-Health-Facts-for-Bisexual-Populations.pdf Mental Health Facts for Bisexual Populations]</ref> claimed that "bisexuality in women was relatively uncontroversial"<ref>[https://twitter.com/profjmb/status/1285612535702577156 Bailey Tweet]</ref> despite it being proven that bisexual women face prejudice and stigma equaling or greater that leveled at bisexual men.<ref>[https://www.them.us/story/study-explains-lesbian-bias-against-bisexual-women Study Explains Lesbian Bias Against Bisexual Women]</ref> When challenged, Bailey said "We tried to find equivalent controversy but were unable to. What did we miss?" — he and his cohort apparently missed the majority of academic study, government surveys,<ref>[https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/sexuality/articles/lesbiangayandbisexualpeoplesaytheyexperiencealowerqualityoflife/2017-07-05  Bisexuals Have Lower Life Satisfsction]</ref> activism, and charity work<ref>[https://ilga.org/downloads/Human_Rights_of_Bisexual_Persons_English.pdf The Human Rights of Bisexual Persons by ILGA]</ref> related to double stigma,<ref>[https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/01/31/bisexual-women-double-stigma-lesbians-gay-men-androcentric-desire-hypothesis/ Bisexual Women Face Double Stigma]</ref> prejudice against bisexuals, fetishization of bisexual women,<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45580578 Fetishised and Forgotten]</ref> and that bisexual women face higher rates of domestic violence than gay or straight women<ref>[https://www.hrc.org/resources/sexual-assault-and-the-lgbt-community Sexual Assault and the LGBT Community]</ref> — all well documented over the last fifty years.

After claiming that bisexuality in women is "relatively uncontroversial", he then stated: "Sexual arousal patterns are much less related to women's sexual identities than they are to men's. In fact, they are nearly irrelevant to women's. We don't really understand female sexual orientation, if it exists."<ref>J. Michael Bailey (July 21, 2020). [https://web.archive.org/web/20220106045754/https://twitter.com/profjmb/status/1285672231532736512 "This does not mean that women are more bisexual, however. Sexual arousal patterns are much less related to women's sexual identities than they are to men's. In fact, they are nearly irrelevant to women's. We don't really understand female sexual orientation, if it exists."] ''Twitter'', via the Wayback Machine.</ref>

==See also==
* [[Steve Sailer]], connected to Bailey and Blanchard via Sailer's "[[HBD|Human Biodiversity]] Institute".<ref>Heidi Beirich and Bob Moser (December 31, 2003). [https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/northwestern-university-psychology-professor-j-michael-bailey-looks-queer-science "Northwestern University Psychology Professor J. Michael Bailey Looks into Queer Science"]. ''Intelligence Report''. Southern Poverty Law Center.</ref><ref>Steve Sailer (July 20, 1999). [https://web.archive.org/web/20030710022759/http://members.aol.com:80/steveslr/roster.htm "Roster of Human Biodiversity Discussion Group Members"]. AOL.</ref>

==External links==
*[http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/JMichael-Bailey/ Bailey's website at Northwestern University]
*[http://juliaserano.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/alice-dreger-and-making-evidence-fit.html Alice Dreger’s disingenuous campaign against transgender activism] &mdash; a summary of the Dreger and Bailey kerfuffle

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

[[Category:Transphobes]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience promoters]]
[[Category:Shysters]]
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:Sexologists]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Bailey, J. Michael}}

Categories: Transphobes, Pseudoscience promoters, Shysters, Living people, Sexologists