After reading "Sex and Transsexuals" [December 12] I can well understand why trannies are not happy about the work of J. Michael Bailey. My own academic background is in sociology. By my freshman year I already knew that a sample size of seven was far too small to draw any firm, broad conclusions about anything whatsoever. I find it impossible to believe that the chairman of the Northwestern University psychology department was blissfully unaware of this. The attempt to get "autogynephilia" listed as a disorder based on questionable conclusions drawn from an analysis of only seven people does indeed impress me as a fundamentally bogus effort to impose a transphobic right-wing agenda on the scientific community.
It strikes me as highly unlikely that all M-F trannies are motivated primarily by the desire to have a vagina, considering that many trannies complete all of the sexual reassignment procedure except the change of sexual organs.
When all the bogus psychologizing is said and done, I suspect most M-F trannies more likely make their choice on a basis of concluding that sugar, spice, and everything nice is a better deal than snakes, snails, and puppy-dog tails. I am not inclined to argue with them.