The reason that the term "Female Transsexual" was ever defined as it is in this article, is in large part because of Dr. Robert Stoller's work. Stoller believed that a assumed female at birth could not even be transsexual at all! He rejected the idea that anyone could change their sex, so this is why he used the term female transsexual as 1. Non existing, and 2. a female at birth to never be a man. and for the Female transsexuals as we define today, he believed males could be transsexual but that they would always be male and to ever call one a female transsexual would to be non professional and ignorant by feeding into their mental illness.
Yes in my book I address this head on. I take his case and I put it to the test and blow it away.
In his case of Mary/Jack he comes up with the psychological findings that he explains away by addressing the mother as having mental issues, and sexual issues, and he also describes the father in a rather interesting way. I have a case that I use in comparision Lisa/Eric that totally blows his work out of the water. I also explain that a Female and Male Transsexual is the opposite of what Stoller uses and I explain why it is inaccurate, inappropriate and offensive with out need!
It is absolutely offensive, ignorant and yet...seen as being brilliant and appropriate at the time it was accepted, and still it is used in many circles. This does have to stop, but it only stops by creating new research data and this was one of my goals in the work that I have done.
If anyone would like to read Stoller's case I believe the entire thing is summarized in my book, but you can also read his work from his book ( If you really want to support his work by paying for it) I will offer that up :
Robert J Stoller
Presentation of Gender
New Haven London/ Yale Press
1985
NOTE: His research work on TS individuals started back in the 1960's, and I believe his early work when he did the study of Mary/Jack, but the book year that I have and worked from was 1985. I know he worked with Garfinkel who did a record breaking study called Harold and Agnes, and was later torn apart by Denzin, who has done some amazing work! Garfinkel looked up to Stoller and this got him into some problems that surfaced later. ( Garfinkel made a grave error and retracted things later, which we must at least credit him for)
While we may find this offensive, personally I find it sickening not just offensive...it is what has shaped social opinions, professional treatment trends and professional opinions, and it does not just disappear..the framework must be rebuilt, re established and then others have something more appropriate to carry forward with...
I am glad that this topic came up in here, because if the TS/IS population is not aware of the need for future and ongoing research, who are we going to leave it in the hands of?
The work I did is what is considered a Ethnomethodological study, and most of the work that is done on TS/IS work is clinical, and you get results like Stoller's....who then others as you have read build off of and are biased by...great work huh? ( thats a snide comment by the way)
This stuff just gets my goat....
Peace,
Taylor