Moving past the Bailey brouhahaSometimes it is best to appreciate a debate for what it is and leave it at that. The prolonged controversy over Northwestern psychology professor J. Michael Bailey's research for his 2003 book, "The Man Who Would Be Queen," has marred the potential for important dialogue with personal vendetta.
The fracas has swirled not around Bailey's theory - that men who become women do so out of an erotic fascination with seeing themselves as women - but around his research methods. Though the book used pseudonyms, two men-to-women transgenders who Bailey interviewed during his research came forward post-publication, alleging Bailey had used their stories without consent. The backlash snowballed quickly, prompting a formal investigation by the university into Bailey's research.
He has since been vindicated: A report authored by NU ethics scholar Alice Dreger concluded, after a review of his research and writing process, that no misconduct had occurred. Yet the flood of personal attacks vitriol continues unabated.
Bailey's plight has become fodder for renegade bloggers and malcontent activists who have removed the discussion from the realm of productive academic debate. One critic posted pictures of Bailey and his family online above crude, sexual captions. Anjelica Kieltyka, one of Bailey's original interview subjects, told The Daily she has devoted her life "24/7" to bringing down Bailey ("Report clearing prof leaves critics unsatisfied," Oct. 17).
In the context of the greater debate on homosexual and transsexual rights, the relentless defamation of one man's character is a trite and harmful path to follow.
We are glad that Dreger's efforts have begun to exonerate Bailey from the firestorm of ethics accusations. It is now time to lay other grievances to rest and put the debacle behind us.
The tax plan that got awayYou might assume the $1.2 billion in new Chicago taxes Mayor Richard M. Daley recently proposed would be used to help alleviate the impending shutdowns and cutbacks on Chicago Transit Authority service. Or maybe it's to slash the city's pension debts? Or Chicago's endless budget deficit? Wrong.
Spring Break
The DAILY encourages you to share your thoughts on this story. Please help us keep the discussion lively, but civil. Comments that are abusive to others, off-topic or vulgar, or comments that misrepresent someone's identity, will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete any comments in violation or to close comment threads on articles.
Please e-mail online@dailynorthwestern.com to flag a comment or for more information.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
A.
posted 10/23/07 @ 3:47 AM CST
The proper terminology is not 'transgenders.' If you were writing an article about other members of the LGB community, would you call them 'gays' or 'gay people/students'?
I understand the motivation to move on past the controversy, but is it possible that the editorial could at least show a little respect to the people involved, even if they aren't our beloved professors? In fact, is it possible that the Daily could be a little more sensitive to gender issues period? I am a transgender person, and when I was described in a previous issue of the Daily, I was called a woman, despite the fact that during the reporter's visit, I was referred to by my companions as 'he' and as someone's 'boyfriend'. (Continued…)
David Spett
posted 10/23/07 @ 12:14 PM CST
You write that the Bailey debate is about the professor's research methods, not his theory. While it may appear that way on its face, I would argue the opposite. (Continued…)
Nick
posted 10/23/07 @ 1:58 PM CST
"We are glad that Dreger's efforts have begun to exonerate Bailey from
the firestorm of ethics accusations. It is now time to lay other
grievances to rest and put the debacle behind us. (Continued…)
Post a Comment