The Dredge Is At It Again

Yes, Alice Dreger – J. Michael Bailey’s one-woman, Guggenheim-funded Greek chorus of anti-transsexual hatred – is at it again.

This time its in the October newsletter of the – get your gag reflex ready – History of Science Society.

And The Dredge is now not simply misappropriating scholarly victimhood, she’s shooting her wad, going for broke, yadda yadda yadda…

In the Service of Galileo’s Ghost: A Short Guide to History, Assault, and Ideology 
 Sorry Alice, but you long ago stopped being curiouser or even merely a curiousity.  You’re light-years beyond Wonderland on the wackadoo scale.

Exhibit 487,302,216 – an attempt to rehabilitate (actually, habilitate might be the better word, since I’m not sure there was ever any credibility to fall down from in the first instance) the pathetic ringer-wannabe who was in the audience at the Bailey Brouhaha panel at the 2008 National Women’s Studies Association Conference:

Rosa stood up and said:
“Rosa Lee Klaneski, Trinity College. I cite Alice Dreger’s academically-rigorous work all the time in my own work.”

Here is a piece of her “work”:

And here’s just one of the reviews of it at Amazon:

In this book, Rosa Lee tries to argue that gender is not a social construction (an interesting thesis that seems highly relevant to modern feminism) through transgender theory and—here is where it all breaks down—quantum physics. Somehow Lee got the idea that quantum mechanics (she makes frequent analogies to physics she clearly doesn’t understand) could be used to explain away the more grievous logical errors in her ultimate conclusion: “society is a contruction of gender.”

Lee writes: “The patriarcy deliberately planted the philosophical seeds of post-structuralist feminism to distract feminists from reality’s true nature[…].” Her entire understanding of her opposition is limited to this sort of absurd conspiracy-theory.

Which, of course, makes her the perfect compatriot for The Dredge.

Now, back to what said Dredge was attempting to ‘prove’ in the History of Science newsletter – continuing her quote of Lee’s attempt to be witty in 2008:

“She doesn’t know who I am but I know who she is. And I am just wondering[…]– and I’m a transgender person myself – what gives any transgender person the right to abrogate someone else’s first amendment right to freedom of speech just because they hold an unpopular minority view? In my opinion [regarding] the person that you are arguing against [i.e., scientist Michael Bailey, my historical subject], I completely agree with you. Bunk. Ridiculous science. And should be classified as such. I got that. What gives us the right to censor [Dreger’s or Bailey’s work] just because we don’t like it?”

Now here is where The Chicanery of The Dredge really kicks into high gear.  Remember what Rosa Lee has, at this point alleged: Those of us private-citizen transsexuals who are rightly pointing out all that is wrong with J. Michael Bailey are violating his First Amendment rights.

I do want to thank The Dredge for transcribing Lee’s words; they (and the other audience comments) weren’t as audible as I would have liked on my audio recording (though I think they’re a bit moreso on the video.)  However…

The objection raised in return was that the panel didn’t constitute censorship. Technically this was true

Uh…no.  There was nothing technical about it.

Not only are those who have disproven – and continue to disprove – Bailey not government actors (at least not while doing so), but there is not nor has there ever been an absolute right to free speech! Waving your pathetic Ph.D. does not immunize you (or Bailey, or Blanchard, etc.) from the consequences of speech. 

but anyone with any background on this knew – as Rosa and I did – the intimidation tactics used to try to silence Bailey, me, and others.

You mean like illegimately procuring scientific gloss for fraudulent trans-exterminationist fairy tales (that NARTH-oids likely frighten their children to sleep with), claiming victimhood when you and your chorusmasters are called on its fraudulence (and the implicit collective defamation inherent in the false legitimizing of it), actually intimidating your critics (up to and including not-so-veiled threats to pre-sabotage the careers of trans women who dare to attempt to acquire credentials to compete against yours), and further silencing your critics by smothering all real discussion with Guggenheim-gilded new ‘work’ of your own which further falsely fertilizes your otherwise fallow field of victimhood.

You mean like that?

Yeh – I didn’t think so.

12 Responses to The Dredge Is At It Again

  1. Kathy says:

    In the Service of Galileo’s Ghost? Isn’t that grandiose, even by her standards?

    Perhaps for balance, they can subtitle it “The Drege Report”.

  2. translegalhistorian says:


    If I had to choose between Dredge and Drudge….

    could I go off the board and choose to have my colon gnawed out from the inside by a rabid wolverine?

  3. Kathy says:

    Is there something about the academic world that makes arguments like:

    1. Challenging someone is censorship.
    2. Therefore, I want to stop you’re talking when you challenge someone I agree with

    make sense?

    I mean, they didn’t even steal the underpants.

  4. translegalhistorian says:

    Speaking as someone who is herself seeking a Ph.D., I’ve come to believe that the letters stand for ‘Put Head in Dung.’

    Or, at least, I have to assume that that is what someone told The Dredge to do – leading to instant acquiescence.

  5. rika virgo says:

    Alice Dreger is comparing herself to Galileo? This sounds more than delusional, it sounds like a psychotic’s lack of awareness into their own illness. Say what you will about gender ‘role’, but the brain-sex research that shows gender identity is programmed by biological factors prenatally is the persecuted view and is not the “mainstream media’s view” by any stretch of the imagination . . . no matter how many gin and tonics you’ve gulped down. Schlemiel, Schlimazl . . . Cheers!

  6. […] The Dredge and The Rosa think that simply calling out charlatanistic neo-eliminationists as charlatanistic neo-eliminationists is censorship? […]

  7. […] like someone is being silenced – and is in need of Alice Dreger to pen a victimhood manifesto for […]

  8. […] like someone is being silenced – and is in need of Alice Dreger to pen a victimhood manifesto for […]

  9. […] of course, acting surprised (topped by the cherry of Oscar-worthy performances as victim) is what bullies always do – especially when they are better-funded than those who they […]

  10. What I find beautiful about the whole thing is the profound irony (though even that is understating it) that Dreger of all people is crying censorship. As I pointed out in the Q&A section you can see in the video, the only person during the entire controversy who came anywhere near advocating censorship was Dreger herself, who used defamatory accusations against Joelle Ruby Ryan to try to suppress her panel discussion, and went so far as to threaten a (frivolous) defamation lawsuit.

    I wonder how/whether she deals with THAT in her book.

  11. […] the reality-devoid statement seems to have more of a Rosa Lee Klaneski aroma to it. What gives us the right to censor [Dreger’s or Bailey’s work] just because we […]

  12. […] the reality-devoid statement seems to have more of a Rosa Lee Klaneski aroma to it. What gives us the right to censor [Dreger’s or Bailey’s work] just because we […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: