54 pages • 1-hour read
John ColapintoA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
John Money presents his “twins case” before the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1972, while Brenda begins her second round of first grade. The case, Money explains, will be published in his book Man & Woman, Boy & Girl. Though dense, the book “was surprisingly straightforward and was reducible to one organizing idea stated again and again in its three hundred pages” (66). That argument is “that the primary factors driving human psychosexual differentiation are learning and environment, not biology” (66).
Still, the book recognizes the influence “of prenatal hormones on adult sexual behavior” (66). Prebirth biology, though, is overridden by “postbirth environmental factors” (66). This is Money’s “nurturist bias” (66). Colapinto explains that it is not hard to see the limits of Money’s conclusions, especially as he explains how difficult experiments are given ethical limitations. Without planned experiments, the Reimer twins are “the ultimate matched pair” for his tests, since their “biology was as close to identical as any two humans could be” (67).
Money’s book refers to Brenda often. It emphasizes contrast between Brenda and her brother. Her dominance seems to shift with time to become a more motherly kind of dominance. In Money’s picture, “the twins embodied an almost miraculous division of taste, temperament, and behavior along gender lines” (69).
Feminists in the women’s liberation movement, including Kate Millett, latch onto Money’s “scientific proof that the differences between men and women reflect not biological imperatives, but societal expectations and prejudices” (69). Major news media outlets hail the importance of Money’s work. “The twins case” enters textbooks (69). Money seeks such exposure aggressively, “rarely giving a speech in which he did not mention it” (70).
Milton Diamond, who had become a professor at the University of Kentucky, continues to find that “imposed sex assignment in early infancy was by no means the magical panacea Money’s writings suggested” (71). Instead, he welcomes in young patients seemingly desperate to change their sexes after living with early surgical designations. In his 1968 book, Diamond claims that the fact that some children accept such sex designation shows human flexibility, not the power of upbringing.
Other doctors take note, including one, Bernard Zuger, who has come “to question the prevailing view that sexual orientation results from rearing and environment” in his gay patients (73). Zuger, in a 1970 paper, criticizes Money’s data and report from Johns Hopkins and “meticulously dismantled case after case” that Money uses to claim the purely environmental source of gender (73). The journal publishes Zuger’s paper alongside a rebuttal by Money.
In an interview, contemporary pediatric endocrinologist Mel Grumbach explains that Money’s work “was decisive in the universal acceptance not only of the theory that human beings are psychosexually malleable at birth, but also of sex reassignment surgery as treatment of infants with ambiguous or injured genitalia” (75). Today, “three to five cases of babies with incongruous genitalia requiring sex change” appear in each major American city each year (75). But even as many doctors accept Money’s study and routinely apply it to intersex babies, Diamond becomes “more convinced than ever that converting a normal infant from one sex to the other would be impossible” (76). At a 1973 conference, the two men have a physical altercation: Money hits, and Diamond does not hit back.
From the time of her surgery, Brenda is required to visit Dr. Money once yearly so that he can track her progress and “guard against the psychological hazards” she might face (79). These trips “only exacerbated the confusion and fear that Brenda was already suffering” (79). In the present, David explains that “you get the idea that something happened to you,” but without knowing what it was (79). Brian, who also visits Dr. Money on those trips, feels equally confused and concerned.
Money’s papers clearly show, Colapinto writes, that Brenda tries to tell researchers about her “sexual confusion,” however well she can articulate it (80). She “quickly learned to try to tell Money and his coworkers what they wanted to hear” (81). Still, Colapinto offers numerous examples of ways in which:
Money’s transcripts of his joint interview with the twins only serve to reinforce an impression that family members, teachers, Child Guidance Clinic personnel, and others in Winnipeg describe […] that Brenda was the more traditionally masculine of the two children (83).
Upon reflection, David relates that it was hard to describe “his inner sense of being identical to his brother in every way but in the anatomy of his genitals” (84). But Brenda seems clearly confused in Money’s documents.
As the twins grow older, Money questions them more often about their sexual thoughts and actions. He also works to program their senses of girl- and boyhood. He wants the children to form what he calls “gender schemas” by understanding “at a very early age the differences between male and female sex organs” (86). He shows them pornography: nude images of children, images of adults having sex.
In front of their parents, Money is gentle, but alone with the children, “he could be irritable or worse, especially when they defied him” (86). They resist him when he asks them to “inspect each other’s genitals” (86). These inspections “were central to his theory of how children develop themselves as boy or girl” and are therefore “crucial to the successful outcome” of Brenda’s surgery (87). Though Money’s studies define genital exploration as developmentally natural, “the children did not enjoy these enforced activities,” especially when they require play resembling sex (87). These rehearsals of what Colapinto calls “coital mimicry” are some of the most painful memories the men carry into adulthood (88).
Based on a trip to tribal areas in Australia, Money had formed the belief that restricting children’s sexual play leads to sexual and gender disorders as adults. Though others studying in the same areas seem baffled by Money’s claims, Money makes these observations the core of many writings and speeches for decades after conducting his research.
Brian and Brenda do not know about this pet theory of Money’s. They are obedient and fearful. Beginning at age 7, in 1974, Brenda resists the yearly trip to Baltimore. Money claims that, as Brenda grows older, she will needs two more surgeries to complete her vaginal construction. But Brenda “was determined not to have the surgery—ever” (92). Adult David recognizes that this rejection came about not only out of fear of surgery, but also from the knowledge “that to submit to vaginal surgery would lock [Brenda] into a gender that was not her own” (93).
Money shows Brenda images of women in childbirth in an effort to have her submit to the surgery. He describes, for her, sexual intercourse. But Brenda only grows more fearful; she has a nervous breakdown before her 9-year-old visit. Though David recognizes that his parents would have stopped the visits had they known the truth of their contents, he also notes that he thought they knew what Money did behind closed doors.
Ron and Janet see only one “moment when the psychologist lost control” (97). Otherwise, they trust him. When, after the 1974 visit, he asks them to push Brenda toward vaginal surgery, they follow his guidance. Janet appears naked in front of Brenda “as often as possible” in order to normalize female genitalia, at Money’s suggestion (98). Once she realizes that her parents are working with Dr. Money, Brenda “began to rebel against her parents openly” (99).
Brenda continues to struggle in school, and Brian’s emotional wellness suffers, too. In 1976, the Reimers pack into a car with a camper and move west, to British Columbia. Having sold many belongings, they become suddenly desperate to find stability in the small town of Ashton Creek.
Around this time, when Brenda visits Dr. Money at age 10, she admits to having more romantic interest in girls than boys. Money asks Ron if he is okay “raising a lesbian,” a question that takes Ron aback (102). Money is not too focused on this romantic interest: He is publishing papers fudging Brenda’s words in interviews—more accounts “of Brenda’s successful metamorphosis”—and writes a book, Sexual Signatures, geared toward a more general audience (104).
While Money continues to find success, the Reimers struggle in British Columbia. Ron works hard and disengages from the family. Janet feels alienated, and her “condition deteriorated” into “serious depression” (105). Janet begins an affair, Ron finds out, and Janet attempts suicide. Nearly a year and a half later, the family returns to Winnipeg. Both children struggle in school and their emotional lives, but they are afraid to be honest, working “to hold together” a troubled marriage (107).
For Brenda, acting ladylike to please her parents becomes more difficult: After her eleventh birthday, her body changes. The Reimers’ reality does not match what Money writes about in his book.
At the end of Part 1, Colapinto follows Brenda’s and Brian’s troubled development up to the point of puberty. While the twins suffer increasingly, both at home and during visits to John Money, Money finds great academic and commercial success. From his idea “that the primary factors driving human psychosexual differentiation are learning and environment, not biology,” he publishes multiple books and papers, reviewed in the national media (66).
Money’s idea is powerful. For the growing feminist movement, the idea that gender differences are socially imposed is a breakthrough. In the gay rights world, though, Bernard Zuger pushes back against the sexual implications of Money’s argument. Though Milton Diamond, Zuger, and others rebel against Money’s thought that gender and sexuality are social, not innate, his ideas continue to find influence in the academic sphere and beyond. Colapinto refers to specific passages of Money’s book Sexual Signatures to demonstrate both the way he obscures his evidence and the ways in which he manipulates Brenda’s words to prove his point.
The work that he does with the family, along with the work he does to hide their reality, damages the Reimers’ relationships. Silence is a growing pattern for Brenda, a mask for her emotions; for Ron, who works constantly, and for Janet, who suffers in private, that silence also takes over. While Money possesses a platform from which to speak, and that allows the Reimers and the general public to trust him, the Reimers struggle to trust one another. Sexuality, a world into which Money brutally forces the children, is meant to be open, but emotional inner realities remain sealed.



Unlock all 54 pages of this Study Guide
Get in-depth, chapter-by-chapter summaries and analysis from our literary experts.