Stevie said:

---

This reminds me, I read a scientific article from 2004 in the New England Journal of Medicine called Discordant Sexual Identity in Some Genetic Males with Cloacal Exstrophy Assigned to Female Sex at Birth. They put to the test the idea that social and cultural influences play the primary role in establishing sexual identity, which is as I understand how things were regarded after the 1950's in medical circles - sexuality a social construct. Basically psychologists used this as an argument in favor of sexual reassignment surgeries thinking they were helping when they were actually doing more harm than good.

This article from 2005 in the New York Times is also great and more on the language of the lay man - Declaring With Clarity, When Gender Is Ambiguous . Dr. Reiner has some very interesting and insightful things to say, he's one of the doctors that assisted with the experiment above. Here's what's probably the most relevant two quotes in the entire article:

Dr. Reiner said:

---

Q. What conclusions can you draw about the eventual sexual identity of an intersex child?

A. That you can castrate a male at birth, create a female genital structure, raise the child as a girl, and in a majority of the cases, they'll still recognize themselves as male. Now many of the children I've seen are still young. I don't know what will happen as they get older.

The larger point is that it's been a monstrous failure, this idea that you can convert a child's sex by making over the child's genitals in the sex you've chosen. This began in the 1950's, when surgeons who felt helpless when they encountered intersex children thought they were helping them with sexual reassignment. The psychologists were saying, "You can make a boy or a girl or anything you want." It wasn't true. The children often knew it.

---

Dr. Reiner said:

---

Q. Can children grow up mentally healthy if they have ambiguous genitalia?

A. I think that these sexual assignments often create more problems than they solve. The children grow up with unhealthy secrets. What the kids tell me is that while they didn't know they were males, they always knew something was wrong because they were "too different" from all the other girls.

In my psychiatric practice, I've had families where the parents asked me to be with them when they told their children, "You were actually born a boy." That turned out to be a critical moment because every child converted to being a boy within hours, except for two. With those two, they refused to ever discuss their sexual identity again. Still, none of them stayed female.

---

---

artu said:

---

He's talking about people "born with ambigious sexual structures" trying to be drawn into a gender they feel they don't belong to by parents or psychiatrists, what he talks about is not your "if you have a penis, you are boy and if you say you are not, that's a lie" approach, what he concludes in the end is actually exactly the opposite of that:

Q. What conclusions do you draw from your study?

A. That sexual identity is individual, unique and intuitive and that the only person who really knows what it is is the person themselves. If we as physicians or scientists want to know about a person's sexual identity, we have to ask them.

---

Stevie said:

---

If I didn't knew better I'd say that you're replying with veiled disagreement just for the sake of controversy. But I'm glad you're actually trying to agree with me again, although the trend is rather disturbing by now. Let me also put it more accurately a bit.

What he's talking about is males with genital malformations being assigned female sexuality surgically and socially from birth for the sake of an experiment, the results of which seem to indicate that a popular myth in the field of 50's psychology that sexuality is foremost a social construct is false. Or, what I quoted first from Dr. Reiner if you managed to miss it - "That you can castrate a male at birth, create a female genital structure, raise the child as a girl, and in a majority of the cases, they'll still recognize themselves as male.". He does not argue along the lines of "if you have a penis, you are boy and if you say you are not, that's a lie" and no one claimed he did, although incidentally that is a method he instructed the parents to use on their "girls" to reassure them of their femaleness whenever necessary.

---

artu said:

---

The only thing in veil is the tiny little detail that you seem to skip, he doesn't use the words male and female the way you do. The thread is here, isn't it? I'm taking your quotes within its context. Your argument was along the lines of "somebody wants me to call him "she" but he's a boy, so that's a lie and I don't think I should." And when people, including a transgender person and anybody else who already read a little bit about the subject, objected by saying that it's not that simple, that sexuality (gender) is not just about which genital you have, there are many more hormonal and neurological factors, you replied "XY and XX is no false dilemma, lol." Now, essentially, both of your links support what we have told you in the first place and what you rejected. Yet, you still manage to quote the part where he practically says "boys will be boys" and present it like it's something supporting your argument, when in fact what he talks about is the gender identity that you strongly refused, not the genitals. So who quotes who out of context.

Once again, you try to take something that disagrees with you as a whole and in essence, then say "glad, they agree with me" when they are (including me as in the other thread) doing the exact opposite. It's not a magic trick, repeating those lines won't make it so. Unless, of course, you are linking these to show us you changed your mind. The parts you picked to quote and the parts you decided to leave out suggest that's unlikely though.

---

Stevie said:

---

I hope you're not turning, fred.

---

Stevie said:

---

Aaaaanyway... Back to ignoring artu. Read the damn thread, Gandalf.

---

Salamandre said:

---

Got that kind or of email too, inviting to a training session about LGBT then sexual harassment - sent to only males. Emailed them back that I identify as a shy little girl and I feel no safe with so many potential aggressors around. Never heard from them again.

---

Baronus said:

---

Christianity is not a love for evil.

---