moonbattery.gif


« Post-Gazette Spits Venom at Critics of Profane Flight 93 Memorial | Main | Norwegian Moose Blamed For Global Warming »


August 22, 2007

Prof Set Upon by Transgender Moonbats

Life hasn't been easy for J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University, since he put forward a theory of the bizarre "transgender" phenomenon that was determined by the mandarins of multiculturalism to be politically incorrect.

In the 2003 book The Man Who Would Be Queen, Bailey advanced the theory that guys who decide to go "transgender" are mainly motivated by an erotic fascination with their own selves as women. This jibes with the grotesque narcissism displayed so aggressively by transgender freakazoids. However, it does not conform to official moonbat dogma, which dictates that they really are women, who by some cosmic error were accidentally given male bodies.

At first the Lambda Literary Foundation, which exists to promote homosexual and transsexual deviance, nominated Bailey's book for an award. But then Lynn Conway, a sexually perplexed computer scientist at moonbat-infested University of Michigan, denounced the book as heresy and launched an email jihad, comparing it to Nazi propaganda.

A pack of feral academics descended upon Bailey, many of them — e.g., Conway and Deirdre McCloskey of University of Illinois-Chicago — transgendered themselves. A weird and provably false accusation was made that Bailey sexual molested one of the transgendered head cases featured in the book. Others made unfounded allegations of misconduct. Professors sent off strident letters to Northwestern, demanding Bailey's head on a platter, as well as to Illinois state regulators, on the grounds that Bailey was allegedly practicing psychology without a license.

Conway's website maintained a constant campaign against Bailey, and included a link to the site of transgender "advocate and consultant" Andrea James, who posted middle and elementary school pictures of Bailey's children, along with sexually explicit captions.

An inquisition into Bailey's alleged heresy lasted almost a year, bringing his research to a nearly complete stop and giving him a reputation in academia as radioactive. Two researchers were told by a government grant officer that they had better keep their distance from Bailey if they wanted any financing. Bailey regretfully reports that his colleagues were too cowardly to defend him, lest they too be denounced as witches by transgender totalitarians:

They saw what I was going through, I think, and wanted no part of it.

He stepped down as the chairman of the psychology department in 2004. But even now, the trial continues. The topic of what to do about Bailey was discussed just this month at the International Academy of Sex Research's annual meeting.

At least he wasn't fired, like Helmuth Nyborg, the Danish researcher who made the mistake of reporting a slight difference in IQ scores between the sexes. But the point has been made: Researchers are not to learn or to think. They are to reinforce politically correct dogma. If they do not obey, they will be made to pay.

deirdre-mccloskey.jpg   Professor and transgender freakazoid Deirdre McCloskey has been among Bailey's tormentors.

On a tip from V the K.

Posted by Van Helsing at August 22, 2007 7:42 AM

Comments

Deirdre, darlin': Obviously it didn't work -- should have stayed a man.

Posted by: jc14 at August 22, 2007 8:15 AM

Thats one fugly She-male.

Jollie-Pitt are at it again.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PEOPLE_PITT_KATRINA?SITE=PAPIT&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=home.htm

They buy a $3.5 million mansion on the high ground in the French Quarter then proceed to build "Green" houses in the 9th ward, which is below sea level. Typical Moonbats. And when it flood again, they will be high and dry with their collection of asian/african children while the suckers who buy their "green" houses sit on the roof waiting for the helicopters. The buyers of their houses will probably sue them both after hiring John Edwards! That would be deliciously ironic.

Posted by: General Jack D. Ripper at August 22, 2007 9:01 AM

Dr. Bailey has joined the discarded club of scientists and others who report the facts and draw truthful conclusions. I hold a masters degree in biology but made the mistake of questioning certain neo-darwinian "dogma" while a grad student. That mistake effectively killed my career in that arena (no references etc.). It doesn't pay to be a heretic but I'd never take back what I wrote and said and I very much doubt Dr. Bailey will either. A day of reckoning will come.

Posted by: Fellowes at August 22, 2007 9:35 AM

Speaking of sex-changes, this one's a real doozy (from thereligionofpeace.com):
Saudi woman becomes man in order to drive a car. I'm sure moonbats would love it.

Posted by: Anonymous at August 22, 2007 3:12 PM

Did you guys see this quote from the story?

Dr. Ben Barres, a neurobiologist at Stanford, said in reference to Dr. Bailey’s thesis in the book, “Bailey seems to make a living by claiming that the things people hold most deeply true are not true.”

So a psychiatrist should not tell his mental patients that they are not, in fact, God, Jesus, the Easter Bunny, a baked potato, or whatever else they may think they are?

What a crock.

It doesn't matter what someone believes to be true if it is in fact not true. To suggest that you should just let someone believe what they want if it makes them feel good is ludicrous, especially when it involves bodily mutiliation.

"Ladies," you still have X and Y chromosomes, you are still genetically men. You do not have a uterus. You don't have ovaries. You do have a prostate.

Posted by: Steve at August 22, 2007 3:49 PM

Tell a REAL woman that she's not really a woman, and she'll look at you funny/blankly, and/or laugh, and/or try to get away from you, or various other normal reactions. Man, but what a difference between that and telling a surgically mutilated transvestite/sodomite that he's not really a woman...!! The vile and hateful response, and the simple facts that Steve mentioned above, just plain put the case to rest. Doesn't take a Ph. D. to see this.

Posted by: Toa at August 22, 2007 6:29 PM

Fellowes, my friend: Looks like part of that day of reckoning is already on the way -- see Van Helsing's latest post on Moonbattery: "Looks Like Earth Isn't Doomed After All".

Ah, payback's a bitch, ain't it!

Posted by: jc14 at August 22, 2007 6:41 PM

Yeah jc14...I intend to reprint the entire article debunking the manmade gw myth and post it in my workplace. Only hope lots of folks are getting exposure to this. Will be watching the news in the coming days.

As to "becoming a woman". Yeah, when you can play the part without having to deal with a monthly mentrual period and all the fun that's entailed then it's damned convenient I suppose. These pervs aren't fooling me. Unless you're born with the equipment and suffer the consequences, you'll never be a woman. It's just a game these guys play and those who make $$ helping them attain this fantasy.

Furthermore, Bailey arrived at the same conclusion that Paul of scripture attained...homosexuals are narcissists, guilty of self-idolatry (Romans 1).

Posted by: fellowes at August 22, 2007 9:38 PM

Based on some of the comments posted it is quite obiovious that the attitudes and mindsets of a lot of them are down at or below the idiot level.

Posted by: Lily McBeth at August 23, 2007 8:53 AM

How so, Lily? Would you care to elaborate on your casual insult, or is an offhand comment the best that you can do?

Posted by: skh.pcola at August 23, 2007 10:50 AM


Agree with Lily.

Only the completely delusional believe that big hair and outfits is all that's needed to be "XX".

Try dealing with these hormones and see how easy it is.

Posted by: Anonymous at August 23, 2007 11:13 AM

LOL- Thanks, "Lily" (I'll bet you're a man) for proving our points!

Posted by: Toa at August 23, 2007 4:24 PM

I believe "anon" was agreeing with moi (fellowes) not with Lily.

Posted by: fellowes at August 23, 2007 11:17 PM

I notice that now that fireworks over this have begun, all those who don't have any understanding of what we go through, are once again telling us how we should live our lives. Professor Bailey has given them a new "Legitimised", academic voice and now they've found what they found the red meat of a semi intelligent argument against us. So now we're to be only homosexuals. Well that's good because then we'll be covered by existing Gay rights laws. No longer will we have to devote our time in passing "civil rights" laws for our mere protection, that everyone else gets for just being alive.

Bailey should have never written this book! It's junk science at it's worst. He doesn't take TGed children into account. Children who aren't old enough to know what sex or orgasms are, presumably are fantasising over having the sex organs of the opposite sex, Yeah sure, gimme a break! It couldn't just be something as simple as they are extremely uncomfortable in their own bodies.
Bailey coveniently forgot about Intersexuals. (Formerly Hermorphodites) Those people who are born with abigious sex organs. In the past, they were "assigned" a gender at birth and sometimes it was the wrong one. Viola, they've just made a Transexual! An old TS say goes like this "If you wern't a TS before the surgery, you will be after!" By Ignoring the plight of the Intersexuals, Bailey get himself off the hook. After all, you can't have people thinking that they might be the wrong gender if there are people who actually physically suffer from this very condition. You can't impose gender on someone! You can try, but it won't work and you'll have a very unhappy person. So why do it? Why try to impose a person's birth gender on them if it doesn't fit? Just to satisfy your own needs?
To bring your little world back to nice and orderly? TGism is the only problem that someone will try to talk you out of having. "Don't be silly, of course you're a boy!" Then why do TGed people insist, with amazing regularity, that they are the opposite gender at the very core of their being?(Soul?) And at very young ages? American Indians recognised this phenomenon, they called them Berdaches. In India they're known as Hijras.
Thailand, Metis and various other places, they're known by many names. So what is the problem with getting medical treatment for this? Why should anyone stand in their way with pseudoscientific explanations that do little more than denigrate them down to a sexual fetish? And what is the problem with getting the desired cure (SRS)? Most of the SRS operations are privately paid for, in private hospitals (and it ain't cheap) so why does anyone care? We're just persuing happieness as it says in the declaration of independence.
Regards, Terry

Posted by: Terry at August 24, 2007 6:58 AM

How many of you supporting this man and defending his "science" have actually read the book?

Bailey relies on anecdotal evidence, misleading interpretations of previous studies, and large jumps to conclusions to make his argument in the book. It's not scientific. I want to see him publishing his thoughts on this subject in a peer-reviewed journal instead of in a book with a provocative title.

Posted by: Chloe at August 24, 2007 7:02 AM


Oops, yeah I was, Fellowes.

I misread "Lily" as saying TransFreaks, not the posters, were at idiot or below.

See, my *geniuine* hormones make me a little fuzzy someimtes!!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous at August 24, 2007 3:04 PM

Is Alice Dreger Carrying Bailey's bucket of Mud?

I, like many other TSes, have spent some in politics and this sounds much like an aspect of political campaigning. It's an old tried and true formula. Simply get a high profile person to seemingly, "objectively" read your material and declare it to be valid, while castigatng your detracters. (Conway, James, and McCloskey) I might be more willing to believe in the legitimacy of Alice Dreger's claims if hadn't spent so much ink telling us what nasty people they were. While Alice Dreger is virtually unknown outside of academic circles, she is well known in the "gender" community. The bulk of her work has been with intersexuals as I understand it. Presumably, she is a friend! Why would a friend support a book and author who seems to denigrate us? Especially when that author's Ideas
come from only a few cases. This is not science!

Why not have lynn Conway or any one of a number of very successful TS women read and edit the book prior to publication? Get it from the horse's mouth! In light of what is now known, Bailey would never take that chance. It would have stopped him cold in his academic tracks! As the later repercussions did. Very few TS women, except Ann Lawrence, believe the book has any credibility.

So Alice Dreger is sticking her neck out supporting Bailey and his book. From what I know, she ought to know better. Not for the threat of consequnces, for she is quick to imply people are making threats, But because of the book's inaccuracies and ommissions.
Love, Terry

Posted by: Terry at August 24, 2007 3:21 PM

Well Terry you make impassioned arguments but please, don't lump intersexuals alongside transsexuals. That's comparing apples to oranges. It makes perfect sense for an intrasexual to choose their sex, versus that of someone who is born 100% physically, genetically and hormonally of one sex. And then there's Chloe who calls for a peer-reviewed journal article. Sounds noble except that I seriously doubt that any psychiatric journal would give Bailey a fair shake given their propensity to agree with their patients' delusions. After all, this is the group that decided years back that homosexuality is not an abnormality, and we all know that only research "proving" homosexuality's "natural" state is just about the only research that gets press. I know this because I've read the other peer-reviewed research that most folks never see in print.

Personally, I couldn't care less what transsexuals do with their bodies. They have the right to do what they wish and I certainly support this. Really. This is America after all. I don't think their surgeries should be done on my dime however. That's fair. Please, please however, do NOT expect the rest of us to believe that genital mutilation and artificial hormone-180-degree-reversal is the normal and healthy alternative to helping these folks out of their extreme delusion. These folks need help but slicing up body parts is not rational. We can agree to disagree, but I do think Bailey and his book deserve respect to a degree and at least it promotes dialogue.

love without getting mushy,
fellowes

Posted by: fellowes at August 24, 2007 8:23 PM

Yes, I will lump Intersexuals with Transexuals! The two conditions are close enough that they can be lumped together. Although admittedly, they're not the same. Intersexuals are usually able to conceal their condition. Transexuals, at least, I could not. The two conditions are like oranges and tangerines, to paraphrase your example. However there are many little known syndromes that may be at least partially responsible for this condition (TSism). Asburger's syndrome is one. AIS, Androgen insensitvity syndrome is another. There are several others which I can't recall.
Transexuals let you know pretty early in life that something isn't right. Most people just brush it off, thinking it's a phase he's going through. I have a grandson who is probably a TS.
we knew it almost from the day he was born. Now, his younger brother (who is not TS)is bigger
physically than he is and he (the older one) gets harrased mercilessly at school because of his small stature and girlish mannerisms. His mother actually considered homeschooling the boy to avoid this. This is a physical manifestation, not something he dreamed up one day. He is a "pretty boy" with an above average IQ. He has won a statewide art contest and freehand draws better than many artists. He is nine years old and most people who meet him for the first time think he's a boy homosexual. He has the bad luck of having a very macho father, who is repulsed by him. So what's going on with him? You're the expert, you tell us what pill or therapy to give him to insure his future conformity to his birth gender role. You haven't got one and neither does anyone else. But there is SRS.

It's Bailey's opinion that TSes are just effeminate homosexuals. Well that's fine, but just where does the effeminancy come from? We can assume that a man wanting to be a woman will not be asexual (Although many transitioned TS are) This acting the woman's role in sex is mistaken for homosexual behavior. An easy mistake to make. It is not! Mentally, it is man-women sex, which would partially account for wanting to be able to complete the act with a vagina. But let us not be misled, Having a vagina is forever, twenty four hours a day. What normal man would give up his privelidged role in sex, to aquire a vagina which would do him no good for the rest of the day when dirty clothes, or cooking, or washing floors is the issue at hand. He would have to be pretty strongly motivated. OK so where do the motivations come from? Where do they come from in natal women? Transexuals contend that they both come from the same place, an inborn feminine element. Or a male element in a Female to Male. Transexuals will tell you that they feel mismatched with their bodies and they have fought this off for years.

Few people want to spend upwards of forty thousand dollars to change what doesn't need chan ging,(If that were the case) Most transexuals have many hobbies to distract them away from their problems. The trouble is that there comes a time when the distractions don't work any longer.
He seeks therapy for the associated problems, such as punching walls seemingly for no reason or temper outbursts and the afore mentioned "Gender Hell". He questuions "Why the hell am I going through all this when there's s solution right in front of me?"

Bailey's work mentions none this! Instead Bailey Focuses on the sex angle and doesn't begin to cover even half of the problem. TSes want a lot more than Bailey gives us credit for. It has been said that we aren't women. True enough! We started off with male bodies and we're stuck with those chromosones. We would willingly change that too if science had the means. We would transplant a uterus and have children if it were possible. We complete the process as much as is humanly possible. We seek acceptance and validation of our place as women, not as men who imitate women.
There are a lot of people who seem to know and respect this, but there are always the ones who seek to expose and humiliate us. To show the world that they aren't fooled by us. This has nothing to do with "fooling" anyone. It has to do with finding one's comfort zone.

I'm dismayed by what I see as an attempt by some to politicise transgenderissm. I know many TSes and their politics go from liberal to conservative and everthing in between. You aren't going to get a handle on it, they can't be categorized, Don't bother trying. The one issue that all TSes agree on is that there should be laws in place to protect the Transgendered. There have been far too many beatings and killings based on nothing more than a person's gender presentation. Just for the record, I'm a republican, who's held elective offfice. I'm a life member of the NRA, former member of AOPA, and distantly related to two republican presidents.
Regards, Terry

Posted by: Terry at August 25, 2007 7:16 AM

Terry - good luck, most people on both the Left and Right don't believe you can exist. The Left thinks anyone who is TS cannot be a Republican. The Right thinks that anyone who is a Republican can't be TS.

I'm a Liberal - which here in Australia means on the Right.


fellowes - I'll quote from a court case here in Australia. The Full Bench of the Family Court had to consider the Scientific evidence, and it came to the following conclusions:

At paragraph [270]: ‘But I am satisfied that the evidence now is inconsistent with the distinction formerly drawn between biological factors, meaning genitals, chromosomes and gonads, and merely "psychological factors", and on this basis distinguishing between cases of inter-sex (incongruities among biological factors) and transsexualism (incongruities between biology and psychology)’.

At paragraph [272]: ‘In my view the evidence demonstrates (at least on the balance of probabilities) that the characteristics of transsexuals are as much “biological” as those of people thought of as inter-sex’.

Posted by: Zoe Brain at August 25, 2007 8:35 PM

hmmm.... I find it interesting that most of the commentors have very low opinions on transsexuals. Why? Is it a religious thing? Does it offend the poor little christians? Really anyone who even turns to christianity as a way to base their values and morals off of is truely ignorant and capable of rational thinking. Christianity: The belief that a cosmic jewish zombie who was his own father can be your salvation if you symbolically eat his body and telapathically accept him as your savior because he died for a sin humans were born with because some ribbed woman listened to a talking snake and ate a magical fruit.... yeah makes a lot of fucking sense.....

Posted by: Anonymous at September 16, 2007 2:19 AM