Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 503–510 | Cite as

Response to the Commentaries on Dreger (2008)

  • Alice D. DregerEmail author
Reply to Peer Commentaries

The Editor has recommended in his introduction to this special issue that, while one reads the responses to my history of the Bailey book controversy, one ought to “look all ways before crossing” the street. Having read the responses, I don’t feel quite like I’m crossing a street here as much as trying to cross a 16-lane highway complete with multiple entrance and exit ramps.

I am honored and glad that so many people have chosen to respond to this work, not only in the pages of this journal, but also in many other public and private venues. I have learned much through these responses—including some things not intended by my newest teachers, but worth knowing anyway. I cannot possibly remark upon everything I might in the space allotted, so I address here what I consider to be the most important issues.

First, what I think is the most important:

A number of commentators help, in their essays, to explain why the outcry against J. Michael Bailey’s book, The Man Who Would Be Queen (TMWWBQ)...

Notes

Acknowledgments

For assistance in formulating this response, my thanks (and none of the blame) go to Aron Sousa, Paul Vasey, a few colleagues who understandably wish to remain anonymous, and my colleagues in the Medical Humanities and Bioethics Program of the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University and in the Donnelley Family Disability Ethics Program of the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago.

References

  1. Anonymous. (2007, October 23). Paper finds controversial Northwestern researcher acted appropriately. The Advocate. Retrieved January 28, 2007, at http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid49932.asp
  2. Carey, B. (2007, August 21). Criticism of a gender theory, and a scientist under siege. The New York Times. Retrieved January 28, 2007, at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html
  3. Dreger, A. D. (2006a). Really changing sex. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from http://www.bioethicsforum.org/New-York-City-plan-to-change-gender.asp
  4. Dreger, A. D. (2006b). The blog I write in fear. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.alicedreger.com/in_fear.html
  5. Dreger, A. D. (2006c). The social construction of sex and me. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://alicedreger.com/social_construction.html
  6. Gsovski, M. (2008, February 27). Debate resumes on methods of psych professor's research. The Daily Northwestern. Retrieved February 27, 2007 at http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2008/02/27/Campus/Debate.Resumes.On.Methods.Of.Psych.Professors.Research-3237442.shtml
  7. Hale, J. (2007). Ethical problems with the mental health evaluation standards of care for adult gender variant prospective patients. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 50, 491–505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Krasny, M. (2007, August 22). Transgender theories (live radio program, KQED). Available at http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R708221000. Transcript available at http://alicedreger.com/kqed_forum_transcript.html
  9. Lawrence, A. A. (2007). Becoming what we love: Autogynephilic transsexualism conceptualized as an expression of romantic love. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 50, 506–520.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. McCloskey, D. (2007, August 24). Letter to the editor of The New York Times (not published). Retrieved January 27, 2007 from http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/times.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Medical Humanities and Bioethics Program, Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations