John Money Biography Quotes 3 Report mistakes

Early life and education
John William Money (1921, 2006) was born in New Zealand and came of age in a period when psychology, endocrinology, and the study of human sexuality were undergoing rapid change. He studied psychology in New Zealand, completing undergraduate and graduate work before moving to the United States for doctoral training. In the late 1940s and early 1950s he immersed himself in academic psychology and the nascent field of sexology, which at the time was being reshaped by new clinical observations and large-scale surveys of human sexual behavior. His academic strengths were synthesis and classification: he was drawn to problems that bridged biology, development, and social learning.

Arrival at Johns Hopkins and institutional roles
In the 1950s Money joined the faculty at Johns Hopkins University, working at the intersection of psychiatry, pediatrics, and behavioral science. At Hopkins he became part of a multidisciplinary environment that included pediatric endocrinologists and surgeons who were treating children with intersex variations. He worked closely with Lawson Wilkins, a pioneer of pediatric endocrinology, and with Wilkins's successor Claude Migeon, as well as with psychologists Joan Hampson and John Hampson. Together, these colleagues built a clinical-research program that combined endocrinology, surgery, and psychology to address disorders of sex development and related questions about identity and socialization. Within this setting, Money helped develop the Psychohormonal Research Unit, a hub for studying the development of gendered behavior and identity across the lifespan.

Conceptual contributions
Money became widely known for introducing and popularizing the terms gender role and gender identity in scientific and clinical discourse. He used gender role to describe the public expression of behaviors, preferences, and social expectations associated with being a girl or a boy, a woman or a man, and gender identity to refer to an individual's internal sense of being male, female, or another identity. He argued that gender identity emerged from a complex interplay between biology and early socialization, and he contended that, especially in early childhood, consistent rearing practices and bodily cues could have a powerful organizing effect. Beyond gender concepts, he proposed a taxonomy of atypical sexual interests and advanced the term paraphilias to supplant older, moralizing labels; and he introduced the idea of a "lovemap" to describe an individual's internal template for erotic attraction and attachment. These frameworks influenced research, clinical practice, and public discussion for decades.

Clinical work with intersex patients and early gender transition programs
Working alongside colleagues in pediatrics and urology, Money advised on the management of children born with variations in sex characteristics. The approach favored in mid-century medicine emphasized early sex assignment, surgical normalization to align anatomy with the chosen assignment, and psychosocial guidance to foster congruent gender role development. Within Hopkins, he also participated in early programs that evaluated and treated adults seeking gender transition, collaborating across specialties to create one of the first academic settings in North America to address such care. These efforts drew interest from physicians such as Harry Benjamin in the broader community, and internally they depended on partnerships with surgeons and endocrinologists who were developing operative and hormonal techniques of the era.

Major publications and collaborations
Money's writing was prolific and often collaborative. With Anke A. Ehrhardt he coauthored Man and Woman, Boy and Girl, a widely read synthesis that presented evidence and arguments for distinguishing sex from gender and for understanding developmental pathways. He also wrote clinical texts on "sex errors of the body", discussing intersex diagnoses and their management. His monographs on lovemaps and on paraphilias sought to create neutral, descriptive language and to analyze atypical sexual interests without recourse to moral judgment. He served on editorial boards of sexology and psychology journals and participated in professional societies that shaped research agendas in human sexuality.

The "John/Joan" case and its aftermath
Money's reputation became inseparable from a case he reported in the 1960s involving one of a pair of male twins who suffered catastrophic injury to the penis in infancy. On Money's advice, the child was raised as a girl and underwent surgeries and hormonal treatment aligned with that assignment. For years Money cited the case, published under a pseudonym, as evidence that early reassignment and consistent socialization could produce a stable gender identity. Decades later, the individual, publicly known as David Reimer, rejected the female assignment, transitioned to live as a man, and described profound distress during childhood and adolescence. H. Keith Sigmundson, a Canadian psychiatrist who treated Reimer, and the sexologist Milton Diamond published accounts that contradicted Money's earlier reports of success. Journalist John Colapinto's book As Nature Made Him brought the story to a wide audience and amplified ethical concerns about clinical practices and research reporting. Members of the Reimer family alleged that aspects of clinical sessions were inappropriate; Money rejected the allegations and defended his methods, but the controversy gravely damaged his standing in the public eye and catalyzed scrutiny of protocols for intersex and pediatric gender care.

Institutional debates and shifting practice
Within Johns Hopkins, debates about the outcomes of adult gender transition and the ethics of intervention for children were intense in the 1970s. Under department chair Paul McHugh, the institution curtailed gender-affirming surgeries for adults after internal reviews questioned benefits as then measured. In parallel, intersex advocates and clinicians across North America and Europe reconsidered early-surgery models. Activists such as Cheryl Chase and organizations like the Intersex Society of North America criticized irreversible childhood interventions performed without the patient's informed consent and called for patient-centered care, transparency, and psychosocial support. These pressures, along with broader empirical reevaluations, led to significant changes in clinical guidelines in the following decades.

Later years and scholarly legacy
Money spent his later career lecturing, consulting, and refining his theoretical vocabulary. He curated and donated collections of sexological literature, contributing to archives that serve historians and researchers. While he received professional recognition for his scientific output, his legacy remained contested. Supporters credited him with helping to carve out a language and research program that separated gender from biological sex, encouraging humane consideration of patients whose experiences did not fit conventional categories. Critics argued that his theories overstated the malleability of gender identity, that his case reporting was insufficiently cautious, and that clinical protocols he endorsed facilitated harm to vulnerable patients.

Assessment
John Money's career traversed the rise of modern sexology, from the first attempts to bring scientific vocabulary to erotic life and gendered development through to contemporary debates about consent, identity, and medical ethics. He worked closely with figures such as Lawson Wilkins, Claude Migeon, Joan Hampson, John Hampson, and Anke Ehrhardt, and he was challenged by peers and critics including Milton Diamond, H. Keith Sigmundson, John Colapinto, and Paul McHugh. The ideas he championed, gender identity and gender role most prominently, remain embedded in scientific and cultural conversation, even as the field has moved toward models that emphasize autonomy, long-term outcomes, and the lived experiences of patients. Money died in 2006, leaving behind a body of work that is both foundational and deeply controversial, a reminder of the responsibilities that accompany innovation at the boundary of medicine, psychology, and human rights.

Our collection contains 3 quotes who is written by John, under the main topics: Justice - Health - Science.