->-bleeped-<-: The Infallible Derogatory Hypothesis, Part 2
Filed by: Kelley Winters
January 9, 2009 11:00 AM
http://www.bilerico.com/2009/01/ ->-bleeped-<-_the_infallible_derogatory_1.phpEditors' note: This is part two of a two part series on ->-bleeped-<-. Part 1 is here.
Dr. Blanchard's taxonomy of " ->-bleeped-<-" and "homosexual transsexualism" follows a long tradition of dividing transsexual women into categorical buckets based on sexual orientation. A premise in American psychiatry/psychology has traditionally held that male-to-female transsexualism is a phenomenon of effeminate male homosexuality, while the label of "transvestism" is associated with heterosexual men. Hence, diagnostic nomenclature and research literature have for decades favored candidates for surgical transition care who would have heterosexual outcomes (i.e., transwomen attracted to men). [1]
In the 1960s, Dr. Harry Benjamin's defined two types of so-called "true transsexuals" as distinct from "->-bleeped-<-s" and "non-surgical transsexuals," based on Kinsey's scale of sexual orientation. Those attracted to men were labeled "high intensity," resembling Blanchard's "homosexual" label. Benjamin described asexual, "auto-erotic" and some bisexual individuals as "low intensity" or "nonsurgical transsexual." He labeled transsexual women attracted to women mostly as "->-bleeped-<-s," [2] and the belief that those termed "->-bleeped-<-s" were not gender dysphoric or attracted to men held until the 1980s.
