Abstract
This article revisits the mid-century medical debate over the “treatment” of transsexualism in the U.S., summarily represented in the most cited essays on transsexualism at the time. The article leverages the stasis point of those medical debates—is transsexuality a product of the psyche or the soma?—as a singularly rich site for rhetorical inquiry arguing that this case demonstrates that stasis has both substance and a rhetorical form that determines the limits of what is accepted as a legitimate argument within any debate. The ultimate aim of this essay is twofold: one, to add to the rhetorical history of transsexuality with regard to medicalization and, two, to demonstrate how the decision of medical professionals to not allow sex-change surgery as a legitimate treatment to transsexual patients had much to do with the rhetorical association of site of malady/site of treatment and little to do with scientific evidence.
- Journal
- Rhetoric of Health and Medicine
- Published
- 2026-04-01
- DOI
- 10.5744/rhm.2026.2979
- CompPile
- Search in CompPile ↗
- Open Access
- OA PDF Gold
- Topics
- Export
- BibTeX RIS
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
Cites in this index (0)
No references match articles in this index.
Related Articles
-
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly Jan 2025Margot van Mulken; Liza Heslenfled
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Dec 2024Randall Fowler
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Sep 2024Andrew Booth
-
The Peer Review Sep 2024Liz A. W. Thomae; Aleena A. Jacob
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Jun 2024Isaac James Richards