Not just silly, but biologically ignorant. See my post above for more.
It is roughly like saying that if someone is born with eyes then they can see. Unfortunately, some poor unfortunates are born with damage to the visual system, others are born with damage to the hormonal system, or other aberrations causing a mix of gender determination mechanisms.
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
Geez I guess I'm just old fashioned. I always thought that if you were born with a penis you were male, and if you were born with a vagina, you were female. Silly me.
That's antiquated, myopic thinking on your part Lisa. C'mon now. Surely you know an individuals needs and wants trump all else. If I want to identify as 3% female and 97% male I should have the right to do so.
Heck, I find gender labels very constricting myself. Gender neutral is the way to go. I can shop at Victoria Secrets on the weekend and catch Monday night football with the guys. Liberating, and all my needs are met.
I don't mean to downplay a serious issue however the absurdity of it all is hard to take. Why don't we lovingly help and support these individuals in their god given roles as men and women, instead of rewriting our very biology and common sense?
rw11 wrote:
Anyone who believes that allowing ...this type of behavior in a young child *is* indeed causing manifest harm to the child really needs to see a doctor who specializes in this.
I'm not a "doctor" (sometimes play one with my wife when the kids are asleep ), but I have had some professional experience (and medical science degree) working in the mental health field (briefly with children, mostly autistic.) Below links pretty much explain why I feel that when it comes to children, we need to be far, far more cautious about this sort of fad science:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/number-50-fall-2016
Extract from above:
"Most children desist from childhood cross-gender identification. “Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.” “[N]o one can determine the gender identity of a two-year-old.” If I remember correclty, 94% of children who have issues with their gender ID outgrow it by the time they become teenagers.
My point is that I really don't care what a competent adult does (and pays for.) I do understand that the 0.1% of people dealing with these issues do feel genuine angst I have nothing but wishes for good outcomes for them. However, when it comes to children I think we need to be much more careful than the current culture/fad seems to be. It would be a tragedy to subject a child to such radical procedures when in reality it most likely would have resolved on its own. Just as I would not accept a photo job taking photos showing how "good" an anorexic in the final stages of starvation looks, I would not accept a job taking photos of such a child. Don't want to reinforce by giving positive attention to something that might actually be causing harm. And all parents know that children very much need attention and often seem willing to do anything for it.
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
Geez I guess I'm just old fashioned. I always thought that if you were born with a penis you were male, and if you were born with a vagina, you were female. Silly me.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, your simple depiction of sexual identity is correct.
However, for a small percentage of humans, things aren't quite that simple. There's plenty of literature available if you are interested (see Klineflter syndrome or xxy). There's also information regarding the effects of hormones, both before and after birth.
The binary definition of gender that you present is the prevalent view in the Western World and certainly one I held for a long time. My wife who spent many years as a nurse midwife, became interested in the subject after delivering babies with ambiguous genitalia. It's hard to be asked by the parents if it is a boy or a girl when you can't tell by looking. Research in ambiguous genitalia led to a broader study of gender and gender identity.
Again, we don't have nearly enough information about this child to know what, if any of the above applies. Yes it could be a phase, but we don't know. There is now enough scientific information to open the possibility that the situation may be far more complex than "just a phase".
Two23 wrote:
[ Below links pretty much explain why I feel that when it comes to children, we need to be far, far more cautious about this sort of fad science:
The fact that you quote the Federalist tells me all I need to know.
dmacmillan wrote:
The fact that you quote the Federalist tells me all I need to know.
I also quoted from a peer reviewed journal, "The New Atlantis," known to be "LGBT friendly." (Did you miss that?) I draw from many POV, not just one. The article from Federalist was written by a licensed psychiatrist, in fact a professor of psychiatry at a well known medical school:
"Richard B. Corradi, M.D. is professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio."
rw11 wrote:
I went to CWRU but don't recall Corradi.
It looks like he is with the VA. It also looks like he is a political extremist - plug him into google.
As for forcing some child into a particular gender identity, there is plenty of societal forcing going on.
A quick search did not turn up anything "extreme" about Dr. Corradi. I wouldn't think he would be on the staff of a medical school if he was "extreme." I did find a couple of websites that do not seem to like him (e.g. "Boiled Frog,") which are up front that they are an agenda-driven organization. My own philosophy is I don't label people as "extremists" because they have a different POV than I do. It takes more than that. At any rate, I'm sticking with the figure of 94% of children will outgrow it by the time they are in their teens. As for "intersex" (alluded to above and formerly known as "hermaphrodite,") peer-reviewed studies I could access suggest 1 in 1,500, <1%, i.e statistically very rare but does happen.
There's nothing specifically wrong with this photo, it's well exposed, the face is well lit and it captures emotion. The choice of a black background might be a little unusual, but I'm guessing it was intentional. But I would shorten the title, and get rid of the caption. If there's a story to tell here, tell it with the photo, not in words.
Don't really care for the politics, social issues just aren't my thing; always thought of myself as an economist, not a socialist. But looking at this photo, I can tell it's a boy b'cos of the prominent adam's apple, so really even a title is unnecessary. The fewer words, the better.
Two23 wrote:
A quick search did not turn up anything "extreme" about Dr. Corradi. I wouldn't think he would be on the staff of a medical school if he was "extreme."
From Case Western:
"Dr. Corradi is an 80-some year old psychoanalyst who was with the department for many years, but retired from practice more than a decade ago: As your note suggests, protections of academic freedom and general freedom of speech allow him to espouse his views, and while I intend to consult with our faculty affairs office I imagine that as an emeritus faculty member he may continue to identify himself with our university, but please be assured that his views in this matter are in no manner shared by this department or by Case Western Reserve, or as the article clearly states the American Psychiatric Association or mainstream psychiatry."
I sure hope this kid isn't left handed. All of our self appointed internet "experts" would have his left hand tied behind his back. My wife and I work in a school system, and it's downright heartbreaking to witness what some of the kids go through at the hands of the experts. We see kids in pain and there's not a thing we can do about it. The experts won't even allow the kids to get a hug. All of you "know it all's" spout all kinds of medical terms and cold reasoning, but none talk about this kids feelings. Sad.
To the OP, you did a fine job with this image. I love it, it made me happy until the analyzer's moved in. Thank you for sharing it.
Ed
Lisa_Holloway wrote:
Geez I guess I'm just old fashioned. I always thought that if you were born with a penis you were male, and if you were born with a vagina, you were female. Silly me.
Not old fashioned, probably just unwilling to acknowledge the possibility that some people are wired differently. A vast majority of humans identify with the gender of the body they are born with, but some do not. And that is the point of the discussion stemming from the story of a 4 year old boy who ardently believes he is a girl. Gender identity confusion is likely a combination genetics and conditions in the womb based on my limited research. The causes of gender identity confusion are not well understood at this time. But that doesn't mean we should bury our heads in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen at all.
Incidentally, gender identity can be fluid in the animal kingdom as well. Various species of fishes and amphibians have the ability to change their gender based on environmental conditions, and the evolution of such abilities have increased the biological fitness of these species.
aubsxc wrote:
Not old fashioned, probably just unwilling to acknowledge the possibility that some people are wired differently. A vast majority of humans identify with the gender of the body they are born with, but some do not. And that is the point of the discussion stemming from the story of a 4 year old boy who ardently believes he is a girl. Gender identity confusion is likely a combination genetics and conditions in the womb based on my limited research. The causes of gender identity confusion are not well understood at this time. But that doesn't mean we should bury our heads in the sand and pretend that it doesn't happen at all.
Incidentally, gender identity can be fluid in the animal kingdom as well. Various species of fishes and amphibians have the ability to change their gender based on environmental conditions, and the evolution of such abilities have increased the biological fitness of these species. ...Show more →
true, but medical science is not always accepted or understood
I think the story/caption is just as important as the image here. The parents are raising their son who identifies with the opposite gender. The parents support this, hence the photograph presented here. I really love the expression captured in the image. The child looks very happy, comfortable, and full of spirit. For that alone, I'm happy for the child. I'm working towards my doctorate in Physical Therapy, so my personal beliefs are geared towards health and science.
With Gender Dysphoria (aka Gender Identity Disorder), a person will experience distress with the gender they are assigned with. Gender Dysphoria has a heritable component. Children may experience social isolation from other kids. They may feel lonely or depressed because they don't feel like the other kids on the inside. The etiology is unclear, but it is not a mental illness.
We don't know if the child has Gender Dysphoria, or if he has even been diagnosed by a professional. People on this forum are blaming the parents for enabling a behavior that is taboo in most societies. Some people think that this child is participating in sinful behaviors because of their own religious beliefs.
My own belief? I think the parent's are listening to their son. They want to accept him for who he is. I empathize for the child and I think the parents are looking out in their best interest for him. They want him to create his own identity rather than be ashamed of it. They want him to be happy. And that is exactly what I see here. I see a happy child comfortable in his own skin.
I actually really like the image because it does make you think. There is nothing right or wrong with what we see. That is up to the viewer. We only have part of a story and an image to complete that thought. The outcome is based on the viewer and their own beliefs.
Peter Figen wrote:
Why does this thread, which has four pages of comments and a pretty cool photo generating them, not appear at the top of the page? Just curious.
That is an excellent question, I've always wondered if the selection of shots at the top results from some impenetrable algorithm or is actually someone's conscious choice,
I applaud the OP for the well executed photo and for introducing the somewhat controversial topic. I wish Ake well and hope that those who would judge her or her parents would take a moment to reflect on whether they would like to be judged on such a simplistic understanding of their own lives and beliefs.
My now almost 16 year old son when he was 3 years old. He got into big sister's princess dress collection. Never once did it cross my mind that he 'wanted to be a girl.' And he doesn't. He's very much a boy. I think that anyone encouraging this child to 'be a girl' are indeed causing serious harm. This new age progressive nonsense 'science' is quite frightening.
Archive 2016 · Åke the boy who wants to be a girl
), but I have had some professional experience (and medical science degree) working in the mental health field (briefly with children, mostly autistic.) Below links pretty much explain why I feel that when it comes to children, we need to be far, far more cautious about this sort of fad science:
At any rate, I'm sticking with the figure of 94% of children will outgrow it by the time they are in their teens. As for "intersex" (alluded to above and formerly known as "hermaphrodite,") peer-reviewed studies I could access suggest 1 in 1,500, <1%, i.e statistically very rare but does happen.
