Exploring The Science of Transsexuality

Through Knowledge, Justice…

If you would be popular, tell people what they want to hear.

If you would help them, tell people the truth.

This blog is on the science, history, and politics of transsexuality and transgender sexuality, including aspects of sexual orientation.  The blog also explores autobiographical themes where appropriate.  There are many myths and misunderstandings about transsexuality and transgender people.  Our scientific understanding of the transsexual phenomena has increased and dramatically improved over the past seventy-five years, yet much of what is available in popular literature is misinformation and disinformation.  Much of what the public, from all aspects of the ideological spectrum, including transsexuals and transgender people themselves, believe about the etiology and epidemiology of transsexuality is based on wishful thinking on one hand and deliberate distortions on the other.  Worse, many cherry-pick among the scientific papers, choosing those that, in isolation, appear to support a given thesis.  Many people have read misinformation and disinformation regarding the science, history, and politics, denying, decrying, and even weaponizing the science, often in emotionally inflammatory language (including vicious attacks on the characters of scientists and educators), that makes its rounds in the echo chamber of the web and social media.  Indeed, there are fora that will instantly ban any who discuss this science and politics in any truthful way.  This blog is an attempt to correct this situation.

Learning an unpleasant truth is better than believing a comforting lie – Don’t let the “tribe” tell you what to think – Trust only evidence, not vehemence –Data, not denial

All information found in this blog is supported by peer reviewed science and referenced (cited) in essay posts covering a given topic found on this site.  Unlike some recent “reports” generated by conspiracy theorists and political hacks, none of this material, nor the citations are AI hallucinations.  These essays were hand written with no algorithms.  Many topics are interwoven with other topics, as they are interlocking issues.  Please explore the entire site for a full explanation of each topic.

There are over three hundred and fifty essays on this site.  I recommend that one read the first several entries in the FAQ as an introduction and jumping off point via the links provided.  One can find a bibliography for this blog if you wish to quickly find papers of interest.  You may wish to review the Glossary if a word is unfamiliar.

Remember as you read this site;  Transsexuals are good people, worthy of our respect, and even of our admiration.  Nothing in this material is meant to imply otherwise.  If you are a transsexual:  You have value as a human being.  You have the right to be respected, valued, and even celebrated as the gender to which you identify and aspire regardless of etiology.

More Evidence That The “Non-Binary” Fad Is Fading – And The “Trans Community” Is In Denial

I don’t like using right wing data sources for obvious reasons, but data is data. For years, I have been expressing skepticism about the huge numbers of young people claiming (falsely in my analysis) that they are “trans” or “non-binary”. I’ve also seen data that strongly suggested that this fad was fading. Please read my previous posts on this issue. Oh… and to be clear, I am NOT the only transsexual who had decried this fad and the silly inflated numbers it generates. However, now the super right wing transphobes have figured out that this was indeed a fad and that it is fading. Although, they are also spinning it as evidence that those who are making these false claims of being “non-binary” are “mentally ill”… because… of course they are.

No sooner had the data on the fading claims by college students been published, the trans community pundits jumped on it in denial, making claims that the data was analyzed improperly because they reported “raw” data, instead of weighting in some magical fashion that they claim when performed shows that instead of the fad fading, it is increasing. Ummmm…. No.

From the hard right website of Unherd,

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which conducts a large annual survey of US undergraduates, polled over 60,000 students in 2025. My analysis of the raw data shows that in that year, just 3.6% of respondents identified as a gender other than male or female. By comparison, the figure was 5.2% in 2024 and 6.8% in both 2022 and 2023. In other words, the share of trans-identified students has effectively halved in just two years.

This trend is especially marked in elite institutions. Andover Phillips Academy in suburban Boston surveys over three-quarters of its students annually. In 2023, 9.2% identified as neither male nor female. This year, that number has crashed to just 3%. A similar story emerges at Brown University: 5% of students identified as non-binary in 2022 and 2023, but by 2025 that share had dropped to 2.6%.

These numbers tally very well with the silly numbers from past papers in peer reviewed science papers I’ve written about previously. This clearly shows what I’ve previously been saying, that the fad of claiming to be “non-binary” is fading. However, Erin Reed, who normally reports very accurately news about transsexual and transgender issues has written that the data is “false”. I’ve noted in the past that Ms. Reed has quoted ridiculously high numbers of “trans” people and why she (and so many others) are wrong. In this regard, she is merely voicing the wish that there were enough trans people to actually make a difference politically, when there are not.

It’s long past time that the transsexual and transgender communities stop inflating our numbers and also stop believing the large numbers of non-trans people who falsely claim to be us.

Further Reading:

Is The “Non-Binary” Fad Ready to Fade?

Further External Reading:

Why are Fewer Young People Identifying as Trans

Erin In The Morning (In Denial)

Transsexuals Are NOT Being Accepted By Family

A new Pew survey tells it all. Only one in three transsexuals is accepted by their parents, while extended family is even worse. The data shows that gays and lesbians are more likely to find parental acceptance, putting the lie to the oft voiced meme that parents would rather have a transkid than a gay child.

The Invisible Transsexual

I originally wrote this essay in 2009 for the Transkids.us website under the pseudonym “Cloudy”. Almost a year later, Andrea James sussed me out and then doxxed me in a rather ugly and inaccurate manner. I am reposted this so that reaches a wider readership.

The Invisible Transsexual by Kay Brown ( aka: “Cloudy”)              I slept through the controversy surrounding the publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen. I literally hadn’t had contact with the transgender community, not even by visiting a website, in eight years. Why should I? I was happily married, with a good job that I loved, and involved in local community activities. But early last year, in the late winter of 2008, by happenstance, I came across Alice Dreger’s history of the controversy. It intrigued me enough to motivate me to investigate the matter carefully. I read many websites denouncing the book and calling Prof. Bailey everything vile. Anything that makes that many people upset must be saying something important. Further, the names of the people leading the charge to discredit Prof. Bailey are some of the most respected names in the community. I had to read the book for myself; and who best to lend me a copy than Prof. Bailey himself!              Prof. Bailey graciously gave me access to an online version of the book and I read it from front to back in nearly one sitting. Although I disagreed with several minor points, I felt I could have written the book myself. I agreed with each and every major point. Who wouldn’t, if they knew what I know.              When I was in my mid-teens, I discovered that there were a range of people who were different in several similar ways. I knew several boys who came out as gay. I knew two boys who were openly transvestites. I didn’t think I was quite like either of those. I researched the issue at the library and discovered from magazine articles that my deepest desire, to live as a girl, marry a straight man, and adopt children was possible… that there was a name for those like me, that I was transsexual.              Although I had been taken to therapists since I was ten years old, I was first seen by the Stanford Gender Identity Clinic, when I was 17 years old, taken by my parents, in the mid-70s, in the middle of my senior year in high school. I had been presenting as a girl part-time in high-school, or rather, after school hours, to go shopping with my female friends and flirt with boys. I transitioned full time right after graduation. Although to say that I “transitioned” is misleading. It was more like I stopped presenting as a boy, as I had no more need to do so.              During my second semester in college, I met other transsexuals for the first time, at the clinic. What I found surprised and confused me. They did not seem to be unaffectedly feminine, without effort, but more like men who desired to be feminine and were working desperately to appear so. I was acutely embarrassed for them. Most were much older than me. Many of them had been, or still were, happily and sexually satisfactorily married to women for years. I couldn’t understand why they wanted to live as women.              If I was surprised and confused by them, they were just as surprised and confused by me. I was asked how it was possible that I had been dating, and sexually active with, men, especially as I was pre-op. I had dated four straight boys who had been high school classmates, besides the young men that I met when I left home for college. None of the others at the Clinic had ever dated a man.              After that, I found a crowd of kids my own age, not associated with the clinic, all of whom were like me. They looked, sounded, and acted like girls. Also like me, they were dating men.              That’s not to say that I fit in perfectly with my new acquaintances. Most of them were very socially and financially disenfranchised; while I was the product of a privileged upper-middle-class family living in an affluent suburban neighborhood. I had some adjustments to make in my preconceptions and values. But like shipwrecked sailors, all in the same lifeboat, we were “sisters”. It was from these kids that I really learned what I needed to know to survive as a boy living as a young woman. We pal’ed around, went dancing with men at straight night clubs together for mutual support, helped each other with hair and make-up before big dates, and talked endlessly together about men and sex.              We also talked about transsexuals. We talked about how the older ones seemed to be quite different than us. One comment that I heard was, “they are just TVs (transvestites) that need a bigger fix”. We also shared our shock when we learned that two kids who had transitioned in their early twenties were both “T-birds” (gynandromorphophilic) and not like us at all… so age at transition didn’t mean that they were automatically like us.              “Transsexual”, one word for two very different types of people. I knew this with a vague awareness. This did not bother me. And, I thought that others knew and understood that there were the two different types. Didn’t we all talk and write about the differences between “early transitioning” and “late transitioning” types? I had even met Anne Lawrence and had a conversation about the two types.              Over the years, I had a few friends and many acquaintances of both types. I had even had roommates of both types. And of course, I have had many gay and lesbian, roommates, friends, and acquaintances. I’m more than comfortable with the diversity found in the LGBT community. I’ve also been occasionally involved in supporting political action in support of the LGBT communities, including working with the transgender community, in my own low key way.              Of course, I’ve also been unhappy with some of the things that various parts of the LGBT communities have done to the others, like when HRC screwed the transfolk with respect to inclusion in ENDA, but I had never thought of the two types of trannies being seriously at odds with each other, both needing the same legal protections and access to appropriate and affordable medical care.              The only serious disagreement that I knew of was that in the ’90s, some transgender activists who seem to fit the clinical profile for autogynephilic transsexuality, and most especially one Texas lawyer, who had remained married to women after transition and SRS, had the odd notion that their marriages could be used as the wedge to force the legal system to recognize sex same marriages. While the homosexual transsexuals I knew shuddered at the thought that the more likely outcome of such a strategy would be that the states would no longer recognize our desired legal status as female, and void our marriages to our husbands, as happened in Texas in the Littleton case!              After I read The Man Who Would Be Queen, I was ashamed of the transsexual activists that had targeted Prof. Bailey. I was also confused. Why were they so upset? Surely, everyone knew about the two types. OK, so Prof. Bailey hadn’t been very flattering in his characterization of either type, but that wasn’t cause enough to justify the venom expressed towards him. I needed to know more.              I found the Transkids website and read carefully. I read many of the original papers by Blanchard among others. I also read many critiques of those same papers by what appeared to be reputable therapists and psychologists, all of whom were transfolk, almost certainly AGP themselves, judging from their histories. After reading them all, I knew, Blanchard had been right on the money.              Blanchard’s papers helped me put into perspective many of the oddities that I had noted about AGP transsexuals over the years. It explained how extremely masculine men with adoring wives, whom they still loved and were attracted towards, with children who looked up to their fathers, with successful careers, respected positions in society, could throw all of that away, to voluntarily choose to become objects of derision, as they would never be accepted as women by any but the most generous and indulgent of their acquaintance. It explained one of my college roommates, a brilliant software engineer, could be so androgynously attractive as a young woman, but run like a scared rabbit from men and women alike, and utter virulent homophobic remarks as I got dressed to go out on dates with men. From the Transkids website, I had an awaking, much like the conscious raising work during the feminist movement of the ’70s. I suddenly saw that when the AGPs use the terms, “early transitioning” vs. “late transitioning”, they use that language very differently than I do. They use those terms in an effort to show that the two types are really the same, while I use the terms to say that we are fundamentally different. I learned that the AGP leadership had fought to deny our distinctiveness to further their own agenda, both politically and psychologically, to rationalize away their own distinctiveness, to pretend that they were like us, yet redefine us to be more like them. I learned that Prof. Bailey’s book challenged the AGPs very core sense of self and origin myth. This was a matter of challenging their religious faith. Suddenly, I had a crisis of identity.              Was I ever a member of an inclusive transgender community, or was I just being used by it? I know that I was specifically invited to participate in several events and projects because I presented well, thus could speak to non-transsexuals and make them comfortable. I suddenly realized that I had been their pet, their tame “early transitioning” tranny-girl. Christine Jorgensen cooed over me and patronizingly called me a “baby TS” when I met her at eighteen. Can I in good conscience ever support the AGP community again? Should I repudiate their actions? Should I speak up, as I have in the past when I see injustice?              But, first, can I throw stones? Was I so certain about myself? One of the hallmarks of those who had so viciously attacked Prof. Bailey and his book is a self-assured arrogance that they can’t possibly be wrong. Did I have the right to cast stones? Was I right, and the rest of the transexual community wrong?              Also, I had trouble with the label, “homosexual transsexual”. I’m comfortable identifying as what most everyone around me sees me as, a straight woman, married to a very straight man. Trying on the label “homosexual” was very disturbing for me. I don’t see myself as a man. Oh, I’m not stupid or delusional. I know perfectly well that I am biologically male, and only have feminine features and superficially female genitalia thanks to medical intervention. But, my self-concept is that I’m a woman. But, is that not how the AGPs rationalize their own genesis?              I’ve always been self-questioning, even self-doubting at times, double-checking my perceptions with the opinions of others. I asked a non-transsexual friend what she thought. My friend thought that I should speak out, speak the truth. She described those who had attacked Prof. Bailey as “two-year-olds having tantrums”. She also said that the description of HSTS kids was a dead-on description of me. And the descriptions of AGPs definitely described several other transwomen she knew. I worked out my own aversion to the label “homosexual”, deciding that yeah- I could have been described as such before I transitioned.              OK, so I can speak for at least one, me. I still can’t speak for all, not without knowing and having consulted with each of them. But I can speak for me, and also I may incidentally speak for some who are of like mind. And of course, I can speak the simple truth, which may speak for itself.              Because of my past participation in support of political and social efforts to help the larger LGB and the T-community in particular, I am known in the transgender community. I’ve written a number of well received essays on various topics of interest to both MTF types, and even by the FtMs. My pen name and my writings show up on more than a few AGP websites, and before the dominance of the internet, in hardcopy trannie publications. My first thought was to rush out and write an essay on why Blanchard is right. Why the transcommunity should apologize to Bailey for popularizing that truth, for explaining who we are to a lay readership. My first thought was to use the social capital I have earned to lend weight to HSTS recognition. But then cold hard fear struck.              I realized the lengths that these particular transactivists have gone to harass Bailey and Lawrence indicate a pathological need to deny obvious facts and a willingness to hurt people in the process. This wasn’t a civilized scientific debate over facts and ideas. It was a religious war with no prisoners taken. If I were to use the name that I’ve used in the past, I would become the target of these autogynophilic transsexuals’ narcissist rage (Lawrence 2007). A small number of the very same people who had been attacking Bailey may come to know my real name and details of my everyday life. If they were to publish this connection, it would hurt my family. It could destroy my career, as I work in a very conservative field, if my colleagues were to learn of my medical history. I know with certainty, that the same people, who attacked Bailey and Lawrence and many others who agreed with them, would have no scruples about destroying my life.              So, I am reduced to creating a new pen name. I’m also forced to redact potentially personally identifying information from my essays. I’m forced to be invisible. But then, I’m not the only invisible transsexual.              Compared to the AGP transsexual population, the HSTS population as a whole is nearly invisible, socially, politically, and therapeutically.              One of the factors the causes the HSTS population to be effectively invisible is that when an HSTS is seen on the rare occasion by a therapist that specializes in “gender issues”, she is seen against the backdrop of an AGP transsexual population that is both more numerous and remains in therapy for a longer time. The most common reason for an HSTS to visit such a therapist is to procure a “letter” giving “permission” to have SRS or other procedures, if she is visiting a physician that requires such letters for homosexual transsexuals, many doctors familiar with HSTS kids don’t require such letters. Otherwise, most HSTS kids have no reason to see a therapist, not generally experiencing a conflict with her sense of self or her choices. Most transkids do not need an outsider to tell them it’s OK to be feminine; they have been feminine all of their lives. They don’t need a therapist to help them in deciding to transition or not. This decision has already been made. When an HSTS is seeking the letter, her goal is to move on with her life, not to spend time educating the therapist. Further, the therapist is exposed to autogynophilic fantasies of some AGPs who say that they are attracted to men, but are not actually sexually attracted to masculine bodies. Thus, we can forgive the poor therapist for not recognizing in a few short visits, when an HSTS who genuinely is attracted to men (masculine bodies) may actually be different.              In transsexual support groups, homosexual transsexuals are in a minority position from the beginning. It is human nature to seek out those like themselves, so occasionally an HSTS finds a support group, but soon feels out-of-place and uncomfortable, unable to relate to AGPs and the issues that AGPs most want to discuss. Unless the support group is moderated by an experienced therapist, the naturally more masculine and dominant AGPs, accustomed to male privilege, will tend to monopolize the conversations. Further, since a portion of the AGP population is strongly attracted to other transsexuals, especially to those who are physically and behaviorally more feminine, the HSTS minority may be subject to unwanted sexual advances from the AGP majority. Naturally, finding no real support for, or mirroring of, her own concerns, and made uncomfortable by sexual objectification, the lone HSTS will quickly drift away, leaving the support group to the AGPs.              Paradoxically, the Gay male community is partially responsible for gender therapists not recognizing that naturally gendered behavior and sexual orientation are closely linked. The fact that the modern Western Gay culture is largely femiphobic, except in very controlled, and thus safe forms such as camp or stage drag, encourages homosexual men to hide, as best they can, any naturally occurring feminine behavior or traits. They go to the gym to build up muscle. They wear attire that is culturally associated with very masculine straight men. They modify their appearance and behavior to conform to the “straight looking, straight acting” ideal of heterosexual men that homosexual men find attractive. They deny any femininity in themselves to make themselves sexually attractive to those that are attracted to other men. The irony is that the other gay men are doing the same thing. The fact that most gay men had been feminine as boys is thus obliterated. The false picture of ultra-masculine homosexuality hides the natural link to femininity.              The Butch Gay male culture buries an essential truth that is essential to understanding the homosexual transsexual. She doesn’t hide her natural femininity and she finds men to be sexually attractive. The two are linked. After all, women, on average, are naturally inclined to be sexually attracted to men, for obvious evolutionary reasons. Further, they are naturally inclined to behave in a certain manner, that serves as external gendered clues to her sex, her reproductive status, and her readiness to mate. We call these behaviors, in aggregate, femininity. It should be no surprise that sexual attraction to men and naturally feminine behaviors are strongly correlated. What ever causes the one, is strongly linked to the other. Unlike her butch gay male compatriots, the homosexual transsexual’s sexual orientation and natural femininity are both easily observable.              But, gender therapists, living in a culture where gay men are ultra-masculine acting, have created a model of sexual and gender behavior where it is not only conceivable, but probable that gendered behavior and sexual orientation are separable. And if those two are separable, then one can go the further illogical leap and posit that naturally gendered behavior plus sexual orientation can be separable from an imagined internal “gender identity”. Finally, the AGP transsexual verbally confirms this with nearly every visit, as separating “gender identity” from sexuality is necessary if their “hidden feminine essence” explanation of transsexuality is to be socially and medically credible.              Thus, the homosexual transsexual becomes conceptually impossible as a separate essential category, as her existence contradicts the separability of gendered behavior and sexuality, avoids prolonged interaction, and is made invisible to the vast majority of gender therapists today.              Another factor that causes HSTS invisibility is the simple fact that homosexual transsexuals, by and large, pass unremarkably as female after transition. This allows most transkids to assimilate into the communities in which they live. They do not feel the need, nor desire, to be “out”. Indeed, being “out” would nullify many of the benefits of living as women that they sought to secure. The one notable exception is the “she male” prostitute, who, in order to find a specific clientele, must become and remain visible in at least one venue. This creates an observation bias in the minds of both law enforcement and sexologists who may seek homosexual transsexuals. But, the majority of working class and especially middle class HSTS kids simply disappear into their respective communities, avoiding participation in activities that would “out” them. This includes participation in the so-called “transgender community”.              Given the anonymity afforded by on-line interactions, one would believe that HSTS individuals would feel comfortable participating in forums, list servers, etc. and indeed, in the mid-90’s, such appeared to be true (personal experience). However, AGPs soon out numbered HSTS’s on any on-line venue, drowning out the HSTS voice. Further, when HSTS’s voiced opinions that called into question the “feminine essence” and “gender identity” narratives of AGPs, a small but vocal minority of the AGPs reacted with narcissistic rage (Lawrence 2007) and ‘flame wars’ erupted. This would drive HSTS participants off of a given forum. It might be theoretically possible to create a moderated forum where only HSTS voices would be allowed, but the very anonymity, coupled with autogynophilic pseudo-androphilia, would make it impossible to assure that AGPs would not soon overrun the forum.              In contrast to HSTSs, most AGPs are unable to convincingly pass as female, the possibility of blending in, of being “in stealth mode” is largely illusory. The loss of family, friends, and often times, jobs, leads many AGPs to become and remain socially connected to other AGPs. The less one is able to pass, the more likely one is to remain publicly visible, regardless of personal preference. This leads many to choose to make a virtue out of a necessity, proclaiming that being “out” is socially and politically a wiser and more community spirited choice, drawing an analogy to, and even borrowing the language of, “out” gay men and lesbians. Sandy Stone, in The Empire Strikes Back; a Posttranssexual Manefesto, called this “reading oneself aloud”. These publicly visible and outspoken AGP transsexuals have chastised those who pass unremarkably, who are “deep stealth”, who are usually homosexual transsexuals, as being complicit in transphobic discrimination by not standing with their more visible peers, saying that they are failing in their ‘sisterhood’ by using “passing privilege” (Jessica Xavior). Thus, it would appear on the surface that AGPs are welcoming and inviting of transkids, but only if those transkids accept the AGP narrative of “gender identity” as their motivation for transition, and give up the very benefits that transition uniquely affords them.              As AGPs are more numerous and more likely to be publicly visible, it is the AGP that the public sees and hears in the media. From the earliest accounts of transsexual transformations to today, the AGP narrative has dominated, including famous autobiographies by Lili Elbe, Christine Jorgensen, Roberta Cowel, Jan Morris, Canary Conn, and Jennifer Boylan . This makes the HSTS invisible, her voice replaced by that of the AGP.              The earliest autobiography of a post-operative transsexual was Lili Elbe’s “Man into Woman”. She was one of two people who obtained SRS at the Institut fur Sexualwissencraft before the NAZI regime came to power. The other individual is believed to have been an HSTS, but little is known of her life. Lili obtained surgery in several stages, but sadly died of complications from the final operation. In her book, published posthumously in 1933, she describes in detail a lifelong cross-dressing habit wherein she posed for her then wife, the successful painter, fashion magazine illustrator, Gerda Wegener. Lili was Gerda’s favorite model. Gerda also illustrated erotic novels, indicating that she was very open minded. Lili enjoyed being courted by men when she was cross-dressed but never sought sexual relations with her admirers.              Christine Jorgensen, in her personal account, went to great lengths to distance herself from any impression that she might have had sexual motives. Though she reported to have been approached by gay men, she rebuffed them with the same vigor as she did women. By all reports by those who knew her, she lived her life largely celibate. Dr. Christian Hamburger, in his 1952 paper on Christine, stressed that both Christine and he declined to create a vagina as neither had interest in facilitating sexual relations with men (Hamburger 1953).              Roberta Cowel lived a life of intensely masculine competitiveness. As a boy he enjoyed competitive sports. As an adult, he became a fighter pilot, shot down over Europe in the war against the NAZI regime. In her book, she describes having fought a losing battle with a feminine body and persona that eventually “took over”. By presenting her decision as accommodating an innate biological process, she deflected criticism that her decision was based on autogynophilic desire. In essence, she lied about her motivations.              Jan Morris led a life that many men would envy, including participating in the first successful expedition to reach the summit of Mount Everest, before transitioning in mid-life. In her book, Conundrum, her decision is couched in near mystical terms, as though this was one of her many adventures, a new territory to be explored. In one anecdote, she describes her enjoyment of how men now find her sexually attractive, even if she isn’t attracted in return.              Canary Conn had been a teen-aged heart-throb to many young girls as a handsome young man. He married and fathered a child before divorcing to transition. After transition, her obviously masculine frame spelled the end of her career as an entertainer. Few who meet her in person doubt that she was born male (personal recollection).              Jennifer Boylan lived as a successful married man, fathering children, before transitioning. Afterwards, she remained legally married to her wife, though she claimed that she is attracted to men without ever having acted on that claimed attraction.              While each biography alone does not conceal the existence of and the differences between homosexual and autogynophilic transsexuals, the shear numbers and the simple fact that none specifically acknowledge their autogynophilic sexuality and motivation serves to make the homosexual transsexual invisible.              There are stories of transkids, of course, but these were usually written by non-transsexuals, in magazine essays or newspaper stories, sometimes sympathetic, but more often sensationalistic. There is an underlying subtext that these kids are the same as those who transition later as adults, but their transsexuality was simply expressed earlier.              The few autobiographies of homosexual transsexuals largely consist of those who had some public exposure, outed, by the press because they were already in the public eye, such as models or actresses (e.g. Caroline “Tula” Cossey).              The one exception, is the story of “Jenny June”, who writes poignantly, in detail, if not cohesively, of her life in The Autobiography of an Androgyne (1919) and of others like herself in The Female Impersonators (1923). In these books, she repeatedly uses, as a metaphor, what Drager would later call the ‘feminine essence’ narrative, including being a “woman in a man’s body”. The use of the term “androgyne” was used to specifically call attention to the remarkably feminine nature and appearance of those like herself. She makes a point, most emphatically, that she and those like her, are not the same as those we would recognize today as gay men, which she refers to by the then current name, “urnings”. She points out the noticeably feminine behavior and habitus of those like her, contrasting that with “urnings”, whom she describes as being only slightly feminine to conventionally masculine in manner and appearance. Although female hormones and modern SRS were not available to her, she availed herself of what procedure has always been available, castration. Through these books, we learn that homosexual transsexual lives from the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th Century’s are not dissimilar from the lives of transkids at the beginning of the 21st. However, her books were printed in very small numbers and is not generally known, even among sexologists. So, by and large, very few examples of transkid biographies are available. Without a separate voice, the distintion between AGP and homosexual transsexual is blurred, obliterated, leaving both the young transkid and health care providers with confusing, if not counter-productive examples.              In the 1960’s and ’70s, many individuals seeking SRS were funneled through university based research clinics. It was no secret that the clinics preferred to accept those who were most likely to be successful and socially acceptable after surgery. This meant that homosexual transsexuals were those most likely to receive SRS. This lead to the general impression among autogynophilic prospective clients that they needed to craft their personal narratives to more closely adhere to the Feminine Essence narrative that approximated the metaphoric narrative of the homosexual transsexual groping to make her own plight explicable. Indeed, some of the clinics outright rejected any individual who admitted to being attracted to women. However, it was not true that they universally rejected those who admitted to autogynophilic arousal or sexual history with women. The Stanford University clinic in particular was noted for helping admitted heterosexual transsexuals. Dr. Laub, Sr. in particular, stressed that clients should only proceed as far as they needed to be comfortable, encouraging partial-autogynophilics not to proceed to SRS if hormones and breast augmentation was sufficient to ease their gender dysphoria, a term coined by Dr. Fisk at the Stanford clinic (personal recollection). In keeping with their desire to produce socially acceptable results, Stanford clinic offered, one might say, required participation at “grooming seminars” (personal recollection, Sandy Stone) which were designed specifically for autogynophilic transsexuals. The sessions included lectures on feminine voice production, wardrobe selection, and make-up, all in an effort to teach masculine autogynophilic transsexuals how to present a more feminine appearance in public.              Sexologists associated with the clinics were able to study the prospective transsexual clients. The clinics were very aware that there were two essential categories of transsexual and eventually were willing to accommodate their needs, although they didn’t have a theoretical underpinning to that recognition. However, these clinics tailored their program’s requirements to the needs of the overwhelming majority, which were autogynophilic. The rules, or “hoops” as they were called by the prospective clients, were felt to be primarily designed to legally protect the physicians from malpractice lawsuits should there be post-operative regret. They were also seen as deflecting legal concern about performing “experimental” surgery that many in society thought to be immoral. The least popular “hoop” was the so called “Real Life Test” (RLT), the requirement that a prospective client had to live full time as a woman for some period of time, varying from six months to two years, depending on the clinic, before surgery could be obtained. For autogynophilic transsexuals for whom obtaining surgery was their highest goal, this requirement was felt to be unnecessarily onerous and even further proof that the clinics were restricting surgery to homosexual transsexuals. For the older autogynophilic transsexual who had likely struggled, attempting to suppress her desire for somatic feminization, and now come to embrace this desire, this further, externally imposed delay, was most unwelcome. Many clinicians remarked on the impatience and anger of these “secondary” transsexuals to this delay. One such individual angrily remarked to a group of transsexuals at the Stanford clinic, “They only want to do surgery on secretaries and prostitutes!” alluding to the two most stereotypical occupations of young homosexual transsexuals (personal recollection – the author was a 19 year old secretary at the time).              The real purpose of the RLT was indeed to reduce the chance of post-operative regret from what was then considered “secondary” transsexuals, about which many clinicians remained uncertain that SRS was a useful treatment. Due to limited financial means, young homosexual transsexuals were rarely in a position to pay for surgery until they were older, most often many years later than any clinically imposed delay. For these kids, transition and hormones alone were both welcome and financially expedient. The older HSTS was likely to have been living as a woman for years, with no help from clinics, having obtained prescriptions for hormones from urban physicians familiar only with homosexual transsexuals that were referred from other transkids. For an HSTS, living full time as a woman is not a “test”, but simply getting on with life. So the “Real Life Test” requirement was indeed literally instituted for the older autogynophilic transsexual client alone.              These clinical practices formed the basis of what would later become the HBGIDA Standards of Care (SOC) when that organization was formed after the closure of the Erickson Education Foundation (EEF). The EEF had been providing funding for much of the research into transsexuality, and in essence, funding the existence of the clinics in the United States, up to that point. The existence of the clinics and the formation of HBGIDA sowed the seeds of the present boutique medical care system of independent gender therapists, private primary care physicians prescribing hormones, and independent surgeons. The availability of independent surgeons and the loss of funding from the EEF in turn led to the demise of the majority of the university based research clinics, as the boutique system was more convenient and lower cost. With their demise the SOCs were locked into place, institutionalizing one-size-fits-all protocols suitable for adult autogynophilic transsexuals, but totally inappropriate for homosexual transsexuals, most of whom present as teenagers or very soon thereafter. Also lost with the demise of the clinics was the institutional recognition of the very existence of homosexual transsexuals by the majority of gender therapists. Thus, the needs of transkids have been made to be invisible. It is no accident that one of the few remaining research clinics, (Blanchard’s) was where the confusing diversity of presentation that non-homosexual transsexuals exhibit was recognized to be autogynophilia, in contrast to the consistent presentation of the homosexual transsexual.              With the publication of Blanchard’s papers and subsequent dialog that occurred in the AGP led community, notably by Anne Lawrence, a growing sense of unease spread as it became clear to many that the feminine essence and gender identity narrative wasn’t being accepted by everyone.              Up to this point, the colonization of HSTS narratives by AGPs had been a passive process, largely the result of AGPs simply trying to get what they felt that they personally needed, as individuals. For example, well known professor of economics Deidre (Donald) McCloskey, whose 1999 autobiography Crossing: A Memoir documents numerous episodes of auto-erotic transvestism, writes (using the third person “Dee”) that: “The young woman psychiatrist asked Dee the usual questions, mentally running down a checklist of the gender-crossing illness. “When did you first want to be female?” “Were you effeminate as a child?” (…) Dee started to lie. They all do it.” “Of course gender crossers lie. They can read the DSM just as well as the psychiatrists can.” “Oh yes” Dee said to the Free University psychiatrist “I’ve always had these desires. Oh yes Doctor ever since I can remember. Oh yes it’s just like being a woman in a man’s body. Oh yes Doctor I hate my penis. Oh yes Doctor whatever your dopey list says”. (McCloskey 1999) (Bolded text is as originally printed)              But with the publication of The Man Who Would Be Queen, a new chapter is opened when leaders of the AGP community organized to harass the author who wrote the simple truth in unflattering terms. From this point the redefinition of the homosexual transsexual becomes an active process as the AGP community perceives that the existence and contrast of transkids compared to AGP transsexuals calls into question their own true motivation to seek somatic feminization. On the one hand, they supported early transition for feminine boys who clearly would fit in better as girls, but with the rationalization that they too would have done so had the “proper support systems” been in place, or had they known that such transition was possible. Of course, the existence of an older HSTS population that had transitioned as teenagers in the so called “dark ages” before the internet, who now were deep stealth, occasionally became an embarrassment, but, given the natural reluctance for them to out themselves, didn’t come out in sufficient numbers to upset the public relations spin of the AGP community.              Presently, there is even an effort by one biological scientist, Julia Serano, to solicit androphilic narratives that include fetishistic cross-dressing, in an effort to refute the HSTS/AGP theory. However, given that these narratives may come from AGPs who have incorporated pseudo-androphilia, of being able to attract straight men, into their autogynophilic fantasy, this may lead to a false picture. Blanchard’s own data showed that 15% of those self-identified as androphilic admitted to fetishistic cross-dressing. But this effort to collect such refuting narratives is not being performed in a controlled setting, but rather through the internet. No effort is being made to collect narratives that may support Blanchard’s theory. Thus, we can safely conclude this is not science, but politics; Ms. Serano seeks to blur the differences between the HSTS and AGP populations. If she can collect enough narratives that support the AGP position that there is no difference between androphilic and gynophilic transsexuals in their fetishistic use of cross-dressing, then it can bolster their delusion that autogynophilia is not the cause of their desire for transition, but an effect of their female “gender identity”. She seeks nothing less than control of HSTS narratives and visibility.              While transsexual lying may have been necessary initially on the personal level for non-homosexual, autogynephilic, “secondary”, “ego-dystonic” transsexuals to obtain the treatment they needed and were entitled to, this is no longer true. Instead, the singular personal lie has become a social lie, required by non-homosexual transsexuals to maintain the public facade they require to be “real”, but at the expense of those whose lives they are attempting to mimic. Thus, the homosexual transsexual is made to be invisible.

Homosexual MTF Transsexuals Brains Are More Female Like Than Gay Men’s

As our brain imaging tools have gotten better, along with being more careful to differentiate Male-To-Female (MTF) Homosexual Transsexuals (HSTS) from Autogynephilic (AGP), we have learned more about the brains of each and how they differ from controls. In a recently openly published paper (not behind a paywall) using advanced MRI tools, the authors found that HSTS were indeed more female like in certain brain regions than both straight and gay men. This last is important in that it has long been contended that sexual orientation was a confound when comparing HSTS & AGP transsexuals to heterosexual men and women. To wit, that the difference between HSTS and AGP was purely, their sexual orientation, not any intrinsic differences between them. There had been a previous study that found that HSTS and conventional gay had a difference in brain morphology in one region, while both were different than AGPs. But this latest study provides corroborating evidence that there is a difference between gay men and MTF HSTS.

The study was conducted in northern Thailand, where a much higher percentage of the transsexual population is HSTS, called sao praphet song (second type of woman) are exclusively androphilic, attracted to masculine men, than AGP. (The reverse being true in the Western nations, of which many misrepresent their sexuality to researchers, creating a false signal.) The study further differentiated those who had been taking feminizing hormones, Gender Affirming Hormones (GAH = HRT), from those that had not yet taken any, reducing the confound of exogenous hormone use.

The result was confirmation that those HSTS who had not (yet) been on feminizing hormones had brain structures that more closely matched the female controls than gay men. It also confirmed that HRT use further feminized the brains of the HSTS. This means that there was pre-existing female like brain structures that differentiate HSTS from both gay and straight men. This adds weight to the model that the difference between HSTS and gay men is NOT a simple matter of cultural or personal experience, but of in-born differences from pre- or peri-natal time periods. It also puts to rest the supposition that the difference between HSTS and AGPs is purely that of sexual orientation, as prior studies have NOT shown any pre-HRT shifts to female like brain morphology in AGPs.

Further Reading:

Brainstorm

Models of Androphilic Transwomen Etiology

Reference:

Thurston, L.T., Rodkong, A., Saokhieo, P., Supindham, T., Kaewthip, O., Wantanajittikul, K., Skorska, M.N., Lai, M.-C., Chariyalertsak, S., Saekho, S. and VanderLaan, D.P. (2025), White Matter Microstructure Among Straight and Gay Cisgender Men, Sao Praphet Song, and Straight Cisgender Women in Thailand. Hum Brain Mapp, 46: e70188. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.70188

Yes, Women Have Prostates Too

— And no, I’m not talking about transwomen.

I’ve seen a number of very ugly transphobic comments online mocking transwomen about having prostates as though that proved something, as though it debunked the existence of transsexuality or of transsexuals right to live a good enough life. One bigot remarked sarcastically, “I’m waiting for that female prostate exam.”

The joke is on them. Women DO have prostates.

Yes, they do, and I’m not crazy. But, while a healthy, intact, male has a much larger one, women have a small prostate in the exact same location involving much of the same tissue types. Women’s prostates even produce the classic Prostate Specific Antigen “PSA” as men’s.

So why do so many people falsely believe that female mammals don’t have prostates? Probably for the same reason so many people don’t know that men have breast tissue that can become cancerous. Most people like to think that males and females are more different, biologically, than they really are. Consider that many sexually dimorphic organs in the body are really homologous. That is, they develop from the same fetal tissue and often perform similar, though slightly different functions. Take for example testes and ovaries. They are homologous and both produce gametes. But in one, they produce tiny motile gametes, in the other, larger sessile gametes. But both are gonads, produce hormones, and start out the same and in the same bodily positions, though one tends to migrate to a new home during fetal development. In the exact same vein, the penis and the clitoris are homologous. They only differ in size and in one case, develop to fold around the urethra. In the case of prostates, the difference is primarily of size, mediated by hormones. But, historically, because of the size difference, one got called a “prostate gland” while another got called a “Skene’s Gland” (after the man who “discovered” it of course).

Because as men grow older, the chance of developing prostate cancer becomes increasingly great, many doctors will order a PSA test for their older male patients. In fact about one out of eight men will develop prostate cancer. If cancer does develop, one of the first line treatments is anti-androgens. That is because a curious thing happens to the prostate in the absence of androgens, it shrinks, rapidly and drastically via an active process whereby genes that are suppressed by androgens switch on that kill off prostate cells. The cells that are killed off are the very ones most likely to become cancerous!

Thus, we come to MTF transsexuals, especially those who have not only been on feminizing HRT but also had full “bottom surgery”. Their prostates have involuted to such an extent, with exactly the potentially cancerous cells having been killed off, essentially having been prophylactically treated for such cancer, that the risk of developing such prostate cancer is significantly reduced. But doctors who are not specialized in transsexual medicine are all too often ignorant of this (and other issues) and will mistakenly order a PSA screening. I’ve also seen some older transitioning transwomen recommending such screening, similarly ignorant of our biology and the effects of HRT and surgery. In the case of older transwomen who began HRT as teenagers, such as myself, this is doubly dumb.

Because natal females do have prostates, they can become diseased, including developing cancer. But because of the low androgen exposure, their risk is de minimus. In fact, only twenty cases have been reported in the literature. If cancer or other issues with their prostate is suspected, a PSA test may be ordered.

So, yes Virginia, you may be taking a “female prostate test”.

Further Reading:

Biological Reality! Transsexual Women’s Breasts Are Female Breasts

“Health risks for men your age…”

References:

Milan Zaviačič, Richard J. Ablin, “The Female Prostate”, JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Volume 90, Issue 9, 6 May 1998, Page 713, https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/90.9.713

Zaviacic M, Ablin RJ. “The female prostate and prostate-specific antigen. Immunohistochemical localization, implications of this prostate marker in women and reasons for using the term “prostate” in the human female.” Histol Histopathol. 2000 Jan;15(1):131-42. doi: 10.14670/HH-15.131. PMID: 10668204. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10668204/

Diane Tomalty, Olivia Giovannetti, Johanna Hannan, Barry Komisaruk, Sue Goldstein, Irwin Goldstein, Michael Adams, “Should We Call It a Prostate? A Review of the Female Periurethral Glandular Tissue Morphology, Histochemistry, Nomenclature, and Role in Iatrogenic Sexual Dysfunction”,
Sexual Medicine Reviews, (2022)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2021.12.002.

Haller, B., Brock, J., Chung, E. and O’Connell, H.E. (2025), Comparison of female and male prostate glands. BJU Int, 135: 582-583. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.16646

Homosexual Transsexuals Have Female Typical Brain Responses To Erotic Images

Somehow, when I started writing these essays in 2009 I missed a paper published that year. In it, the authors reported on the cerebral responses of 12 Male-To-Female transsexuals to erotic stimuli using fMRI imaging. Two things were of note regarding their study. First, they used the term “transsexual”, NOT “transgender”. Second, they clearly knew about the Two Type Taxonomy and insured that their subjects were only one of the two types; or had they? Consider the demographics:

“12 MTF transsexuals before any treatment viewed erotic film excerpts during fMRI … (mean age 36 years, range 20–55) were studied. The MTF were non-autogynephilic.”

Oops! Mean age 36? Some of them as old as 55 and not yet on hormones? Nope, some of them were lying about their sexuality not being autogynephilic (AGP). Non-autogynephilic MTF transsexuals NEVER wait until they are past the age of 25 to being HRT. Given the age range going down to 20, its possible some of the subjects were non-autogynephilic, that is, that they were homosexual transsexuals (HSTS). But we have not enough data to sort them into the two taxons. Given that, I would confidently predict that we would still see a weak feminized signal when the data is averaged, compared to heterosexual male and female controls, having averaged a strong feminized signal from the HSTS and a strong masculine signal from the AGP subjects.

“We revealed a cerebral activation pattern in MTF transsexuals compared with male controls similar to female controls compared with male controls during viewing of erotic stimuli, indicating a tendency of female-like cerebral processing in transsexualism.”

Note the use of the qualifier “tendency”, which would indicate a weak signal, as predicted.

It was good that the researchers knew about and attempted to differentiate the two types. It was not good that they failed to recognize that their ages militated against having done so.

Reference:

Elke R. Gizewski, Eva Krause, Marc Schlamann, Friederike Happich, Mark E. Ladd, Michael Forsting, Wolfgang Senf, “Specific Cerebral Activation due to Visual Erotic Stimuli in Male-to-Female Transsexuals Compared with Male and Female Controls: An fMRI Study”
The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 6, Issue 2 (2009)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00981.x.

Pushing “Identity Diffusion” Onto Transsexual Youth

A year ago, I posted an essay on what appeared to be a new means of pathologizing transkids in a very sneaky way by a clinic in Tyrol Austria. Well, they are at it again. The same people just published a new paper with a ton of data but organized in a rather confusing manner that isn’t very useful, save for a few tidbits.

Once again, they focus on the idea of “identity diffusion” which may not ring alarm bells for most, but certainly did for me last year. That’s because that is a construct that is said by some to underlie Borderline Personality Disorder, which has been bandied about as an explanation for the existence of the putative Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD), a “diagnoses” that has not been recognized as valid diagnoses, nor has it been shown to be supported by the data, given that more parsimonious explanations exist that are supported by the data, to wit, that most teens coming out late claiming to be “trans” or “non-binary” have no clinical gender dysphoria at all, participating in a “cool fad”, and those that do, can be shown to fit the profiles of autogynephilia or autoandrophilia.

But, data is data. And however poorly presented, there were a few data points that are useful, but frankly, mostly reinforce previously known phenomena. For example, in the paper, the authors have divided the teenaged subjects into three categories, low, medium, and high distress based upon responses to various self-scored instruments. Unsurprisingly, when surveyed for “parental understanding and acceptance” the scores were 4.10, 3.73, and 2.48 respectively. Golly gee… how very unsurprising, as we have known for many years that parental understanding, acceptance, and support correlate with lower emotional distress in gender dysphoric teens. Interestingly, there doesn’t seem to be very strong correlation with sexual orientation or “early” vs. “late” onset, which previous researchers have found. So, although the authors also report that “identity diffusion” scores also correlate with distress, which is more important, parental understanding and support or this putative construct of “identity diffusion” that seems largely to be based upon being highly distressed? I’ll go with parental influence.

The one thing that I do find useful in this paper is that they used the age of 10 as the dividing line between “early” and “late” gender dysphoria onset, which I had previously recommended in an earlier post.

Further Reading:

The Sneaky Way That Conversion “Therapists” For Transsexual Teens Signal Their Real Intent

The Origins of the Trauma Narrative of Transsexual Etiology

Reference:

Leonhardt, A., Fuchs, M., Kohlboeck, G. et al. Distress Profiles of Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria: A Cluster Analysis Approach. Arch Sex Behav (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-025-03221-3

Transsexual Voice Therapy in Poland

A new paper, open access, about voice therapy for transsexuals in Poland just got published. However, like so many papers, it has very serious flaws. First, it is a convenience survey over the web. Second, they utterly failed to differentiate not only between “early onset” and “late onset” transsexuals, but even between MTF and FtM !!! Some individuals may never have needed such therapy (e.g. “early onset”). Third, since it is about self-perception it is potentially subject to the “escalation of commitment” bias in which if someone has put a lot of effort and money into a given issue, it must have value and have been worth doing. In this case, those that had had such voice therapy rated their voices as being more “passing” than those who had not had such therapy. But is that self-perceived rating objectively accurate? This last bias can be overcome using blinded raters, but was not conducted in this study.

There are several things to note about the data though. The mean age of the participants was ~21 years old. The second is that it is known that in Poland, “late onset” / autogynephilic transwomen are less likely to transition due to the far higher transphobic attitudes and the lower individualism of the society, both of which have been documented to reduce the number of AGP transwomen while not effecting “early onset” / HSTS transition decision making.

No surprise, given the potential confounds and biases, those that had voice therapy rated that their voices were better than those who had not had voice therapy.

All in all, while data is data. I have serious doubts about the value of this particular study due to its design.

Further Reading:

Transsexual Voices

Reference:

Dąbrowski, K., Marcin, S. & Wheble, P.C.R. An Evaluation of the Prevalence and Efficacy of Gender Affirmative Vocal Therapy in Poland. Arch Sex Behav (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-025-03196-1

Autogynephilia In Pseudo-Androphilic Men

We know from decades of studies that autogynephilic transwomen exhibit a form of “secondary” interest in men that is dependent upon them experiencing sexual fantasies of being women. As Blanchard wrote,

“The effective erotic stimulus in these interactions, however, is not the male physique of the partner, as it is in true homosexual attraction, but rather the thought of being a woman, which is symbolized in the fantasy of being penetrated by a man. For these persons, the male sexual partner serves the same function as women’s apparel or makeup, namely, to aid and intensify the fantasy of being a woman”

We call this phenomena “autogynephilic pseudo-androphilia”

Here, we have a new study that looks at self-ID “bisexual” non-transsexual males to explore how many of them may in fact be pseudo-androphilic and autogynephilic. Of 254 subjects they found that 35%, fully a third of self-identified “bisexual” men are autogynephilic, which is far more than the 3% found in the general male population. Further, they expressed uncertainty about their sexual orientation, demonstrating that they in fact, deep down, doubted their own claim to be bisexual due to being uninterested in men per se, but only interested in them as adjuncts to the fantasies of being women in sexual situations, as one such individual expounded,

“The strange part is that I don’t feel any real-life attraction to men. I don’t look at a guy and think, ‘I want to have sex with him.’ I don’t watch gay porn, and I never imagine myself as a man being dominated in a gay scene. Instead, my fantasies always place me in the role of a woman—whether in vanilla one-on-one or gangbang scenarios, I imagine myself as the woman being dominated.”

Addendum 7/15/2025: A little historical background is needed to understand why this foregoing study is so important. A couple decades ago, a number of scientists tested the sexual arousal patterns of self-identified bisexual men using phallometry (peter-meters) only to discover that none of their test subjects were “bisexual”. That is, that most showed very little sexual response to female sexual stimuli, only responding to male stimuli. They were in fact, homosexual, not bisexual. However, another subset of their subjects showed the opposite response pattern, only showing sexual arousal to female stimuli. When they reported their findings, it elicited a firestorm of hatred and anger from the ‘bisexual’ community and humorous reactions from the gay male community who had long bandied about the meme that all men were either, “Gay, Straight, or Lying”. Further research showed that many gay men were only “transitionally bisexual”… as part of a coming out process as homosexual, a means of navigating our cultural heteronormative expectations placed upon men to date and marry women. However, some bisexual men’s groups insisted that some men were truly bisexual in their sexual responses and attractions. When carefully screened before hand, the scientists that worked with these groups found that a small subset of self-identified bisexual men were in fact truly bisexual. But this still left the open question, why were some clearly heterosexual men claiming to be bisexual, given that there were no homonormative expectations for men to be attracted to other men? This new paper finally offers both an explanation and documents evidence for it.

Further Reading:

How Should I Your True Love Know?

Transsexuals Misrepresenting Their Sexual Orientation

Further External Reading:

Reference:

Morandini, J.S., Hsu, K.J. & Rudd, S. Autogynephilia in Some Bisexual Cisgender Men. Arch Sex Behav (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-025-03166-7

In Loving Memory – Jeffrey Kent Elliott (1953-2025)

My beloved husband of 26 years died today after a long illness. Our adopted daughter Liz and I were with him at home caring for him. I’m crying too hard to write a long obit. But I will say that he was the kindest, bravest, most loving man I ever knew. We will miss him more that mere words can say.

Addendum 6/20/2025:

Jeff Elliott was born and raised in Jacksonville Illinois by his grandparents on a farm outside of town. They raised chickens, sold eggs, had dairy cows to sell milk, cream, and butter. The house finally got indoor toilets when he was ten years old. But Jeff’s heart was filled with music. He played violin from a young age. He also loved the banjo.

After high school graduation, Jeff moved to Boston to study music at Berklee. He worked at a record store to pay his way. Jeff played saxophone in a jazz ensemble at clubs at night, sometimes busking in Boston Common.

Jeff moved back to Illinois to attend the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champlain where he earned a bachelors and a masters degree in music composition, even wrote an opera based on the life of Alfred Jarry. While there, he became involved in the cutting edge Plato educational system, learning computer programming to write software for the system. While in grad school, he met his first wife, Patricia. The marriage was not to survive graduate school.

Jeff moved to California, first to Richmond to allow his wife to attend grad school at Berkeley, then to Sebastopol as his marriage ended. He worked as a programmer for a number of companies, big and small, including Apple, as a contractor.

Jeff had always been interested in progressive politics which led him to become an investigative journalist. He infiltrated the militia movement to report on the growing threat of violence before the Oklahoma City bombing. He wrote how ineffective the “war on drugs” was for a network television news program. Eventually, he started his own online newspaper, the Albion Monitor. To support himself, he founded and ran a local internet service provider in west Sonoma County. After he retired, Jeff turned to writing and blogging about local history.

Jeff had always been a straight ally of the LGBT community, with many gay and lesbian friends over the years, starting in high school, but it came as a surprise to all, most especially to himself, when he fell in love with a post-op transsexual. In 1997, he met Candice Brown and began the relationship with her that would last the rest of his life, marrying her in 1999.

Addendum 8/2/2025: My husband was that kind of super hero journalist! It was his middle name!! We had a celebration of his life at our house on the 19th of July. The house was packed with people who loved and admired him. I’m still weeping, missing the love of my life.

Further Reading:

Family Memories

Further External Reading:

Albion Monitor “obit” (Shutting down the news outlet when Jeff retired)

Santa Rosa History Blog

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO_(computer_system)

Jeff’s obituary article in the Press Democrat newspaper: https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/news/jeff-elliott-santa-rosa-historian-dies/?fbclid=IwY2xjawLKl0lleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFyYjVzakhPYk5jNW5GNnphAR6oCjQedHX2fl7BHM73wuORrvvzd0o3BbzzR28DtR2mLan_papZVy03amB8-w_aem_X071xKMGeO5HwM0FAAh1Rw