Boy Being Raised as a Girl Fails

I just finished watching the Oprah show on a subject that is related to a subject currently being debated here. I decided to make it a new subject since it might be missed if it is put in the other rather long debates going on now. ..

It seems there were these two twin boys who were taken to the hospital to circumcise at around eight months of age, and one of the twin boys penis was burnt off in an accident. This was in the 1960s and the parents were told that the best recourse was to castrate the boy and raise him as a girl which is what the parents did.

The child was given all the medications of the day and they did try to raise the child as a girl but the child was having terrible problems and unable to accept the orientation that it was being raised as, and attempted suicide twice not knowing what was wrong with himself/herself. If was finally realized that this approach was not going to work and the parents told the child at age 15 the truth at the recommendation of the medical people they were seeing at the time who realized that it was a not going to work trying to raise the child as a girl. Understand that the boy knew nothing about this.

The man is now thirty two, married and the stepfather of two children. I missed the part where they talked about the sex organs, so I’m not sure if they tried to make him a new penus or not. .

I think this pretty much supports my view that you can not decide to change your sexual orientation as some people claim. People who think people choose to be homosexual are way out in left field, and It’s about time the Church got off the homosexuals ass, and I don’t
mean this as a pune. .

If anyone is interested a book has been written about this mans ordeal.

‘As Nature Made Him’ by John Calapinto.

Flash
--------
I felt you might be interested in this. I have left out a lot of stuff since I ‘m still trying to get moved and don’t have the time to spend out here.

I’m also sure some of you others might be interested too. This was not a freak show as I’m sure most of you know that Oprah does a quality show for her type of show. She’s doesn’t have a scum type talk show.






[This message has been edited by Zappers (edited February 09, 2000).]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I just wanted to add something that I forgot about and I think it's quite inportant when you talk about people choosing there sexual orentation or parents influenceing this choice.

The parents above tried very hard to get the boy to be femimen. But he rebeled and would not set down when he urinated but would stand like a guy would. He was considered so masculine by the girls that they would not let him use the rest room that they did in school.

The parents should not be blamed in this case since they didn't choose to raise him this way, It was simply stated it would serve the boys best interest if he were raised this way by the medical and staff at the hospital since he had no penus..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Zappers,

Though I understand the point that you are trying to make here, I wanted to honestly point out something that makes me think that this is not a correct answer, albeit a consideration to the debate none the less. But the fact is that this guys parents didn't try to change his sexual orientation, they tried to change his actual natural gender. There is quite a huge difference there that makes it a bad analogy in my mind, not to be critical, but that is the way I see it. And BTW, I think that the church should get off the homosexual's ass too. There's plenty of sin in this world to go around. There needs to be a lot less judgement and a lot more introspect.

------------------
"Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Heh, Lori, and speaking of "natural gender" -- how would you define the gender of true hermaphrodites? Where would they fit in your neat little black-and-white (well, ok, male-or-female) picture? Or did God forget to give instructions about that particular aspect of reality?

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

 

Determining the "natural gender" of a hermaphrodite could be as easy as determining whether estrogen or testosterone is the dominant chemical. Personally, if a transexually inclined person wants to be called by one gender or the other, I believe that's their business. It may cause a problem in the restroom, but what the heck. Life is interesting.

------------------
I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.

 

Oh, but we wouldn't want to get <u>that</u> scientific about it -- otherwise, we risk going too far and discovering that sexuality does not lend itself to neat categories. Would, say, a testosterone/estrogen ratio of 1.000000001 make you male? What kind of a real difference would there be between that and a 0.999999999 ratio? Besides, what's this talk of hormone levels -- aren't we looking to fit this particular square peg into the round hole of neat "natural" sexual divides?

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

 

Zappers,
Thank you for thinking of me...I appreciate that

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I would certainly like to read more about it as it does sound quite interesting.

Boris has made some GREAT points here, Lori..so I'd love to hear what you have to say about it.
Also, Lori..you keep dodging all the scripture and translations regarding homosexuality.....ummmmm how come? This seems to be the one thing that you think should be taken literally...how odd...

 

Sorry I don't have the times to respond to you reponse right now Lori.
I move tomorrow and I'm real busy finishing up the packing. Since I haven't o transfered my phone, I'm not sure when I'll be back online.
I've move more times then I can remenber, but I still hate it and get all bent out of shape when I do...................
HELP, HELP, HELP................

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Averyone have a great week, and hope to be back soon. I really injoy this group and forum

 

What a weird story. It's pretty damn hard to believe it (at face value), that's for sure!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Why all the wierd questions???? That's all I even want to know sometimes....

I am a firm believer that even a hermapradite, morphadite, whatever should be able to have a partner. This is of course a very complicated situation, but to add to some other responses, usually I think that such a person is either more male than female or vice-versa. I've seen people with NO sex organs. I'm sure that there are plenty of ways that these people can enjoy intimacy with someone and love and commitment. What I would REALLY like to know is this....what in the hell did you think I was going to say? That God doesn't want anyone to have sex unless you're able to make a baby? Just because I happen to use LOGIC regarding my arguements, does NOT mean that EVERYTHING is black and white. I am a firm believer that NOTHING is ever black and white. But I'm also a firm believer that in this world, we stupid humans make things a LOT more complicated than they have to be. It's almost like you guys intentionally try NOT to see the points that I try to make. You don't WANT to, so you ask me stupid questions like this as if I'm so blind and spoon fed regarding my beliefs that I don't even give things any thought. YOU'RE TOTALLY WRONG. So why don't you give me a break, and just give it up already?

------------------
"Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

And Flash,

I'm sorry I over looked your scripture references on the homophobia string. I'll address them, if you address my questions regarding men. Fair?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

------------------
"Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

 

Hey, I agree with Lori!

This is a close analogy, but as Lori pointed out, they weren't just changing his sexual orientation, but his sex.

It does seem to indicate though, that orientation isn't a choice, but is ingrained to at least some degree. I didn't see the special, however, did they talk to him about his relationships, or just his "un-female" behaviors? (like peeing standing up, etc)

There's another factor too, that I don't think has been touched on - brainwashing. In this case it failed, but I think a lot of children become naturally brainwashed by their parents on a lot of things. Which isn't neccessarily a bad thing - I don't think brainwashing your child into thinking murder is wrong is a bad thing, for example, but it does serve to confuse the issue.

For example, a child raised as a heterosexual that then "becomes" homosexual while off at college - is it that their new acquaintances have influenced them towards homosexuality, or is it the fading influences of the parents that prevented the homosexuality from being realized earlier? Is it a choice made in adulthood, or is it a resurfacing personality feature that has been squelched throughout childhood? Very difficult to tell, even for the person experiencing the change, I imagine.

 

Lori,

In fact, the stupid thing to do is to make things a LOT more simple than they need to be. Making things too complicated is not a mark of stupidity; on the contrary it's a mark of a searching, active thought process. And ask any scientist to be assured that the universe is far from simple, and that even the "simplest" processes are incredibly complex, as a matter of fact. There is a reason why, as someone here put it, science still can't describe how water flows out of a faucet -- namely, the multitude of interactions involved and the complex emergent properties within a nonlinear dynamical system. So if we can't even describe flow of water, how can you expect to reduce something as complex as states of an entire adult human brain (like "beliefs", "tendencies", or "sexuality"), to just a few simple, primitive even, concepts? How do you expect the ideas contained in a 6,000 year old religious tradition that held the body to be made of mud and the mind to be made of soul, to be accurate models of human behavior?

It is pretty tiring to keep saying this, but once again you, Lori, are oversimlifying -- in a millennia-old tradition that stretches back to prehistory. You define a pseudo-truism and then attempt to reduce facts to it -- rather than starting with the facts and then trying to fit a truism to them (the difference between the typical religious approach and the scientific method.) You are the one who is failing to use common sense. But perhaps your particular definition of "common sense" simply does not equal to that of everyone else.

PS: the questions are only going to be as weird as your statements are absolutist and unqualified.

I was hoping for a defense of your "natural sex" idea. In order to change someone's "natural sex", the "natural sex" must first be defined. Therefore, the hermaphrodite trip. You said that you know people <u>without sex organs</u>?? That, I must admit, is a pretty rare occurrence. But how do you define "natural sex" in their case? Not by their genitalia, that's for sure! So, are you willing to make an exception for them, and actually consider their mental inclinations as a primary indicator of "natural sex"? What does it mean for a true hermaphrodite to be "more male than female", or vice versa? Would that not also be entirely in the mind (since the body is by definition equally male and female)? So now suddenly, the mind becomes a primary determinant of sexuality, not the body! Or do I misinterpret you?

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

I wanted to throw in a bit about H.P. (Howard Phillips) Lovecraft.

First, as a side note, I find it ironic that God did punish the Lovecraft family for the sins of the father, as H.P. Lovecraft would bear no children in his life, and succumb to a lifelong bout with syphilis which his father contracted from a Chicago prostitute, and gave to H.P.'s mother and thus their unconceived child.

This does play into the tale a little bit; both his parents were probably certifiably nuts. His father was named after the most disgraceful general in the South, and what biographical information exists suggests the man's vices were directly associated to an insecurity surrounding the name Winfield Scott Lovecraft.

His mother is where the story gets interesting, and also relevant. Suzy Lovecraft desperately wanted a little girl. So much so that HPL thought he was a girl until the age of five, when he was able to reconcile the mechanics of his body. The alienating effects of wearing dresses for five years may have had serious effects. Lovecraft was admittedly not healthy, but when he was, he still preferred solitude to the company of other human beings. I would assert him to be racist, but when you add up his -isms, we find him simply misanthropic.

We might also consider the effects of his mother's withdrawal after she could no longer raise him as a female ... this, I'm sure, compounded the issues he dealt with.

Despite stereotypical "gay" mannerisms (a high voice, fluttering hands, and a very effeminate body posture), and despite rumors that one of his fellow pulp-legends was his lover, Lovecraft abhorred homosexuality just about as much as anything else.

And so the pattern goes. The specific details of his life, as recalled by L. Sprague deCamp (apologies--I forget the title or other bibliographic information) are wholly depressing, and point to two primary factors: the syphilis that wracked his body, and his mother's obsessive insanity (we might also tick off his father's death early in his life as a contributing factor to Suzy Lovecraft's madness.)

He died at age 37, and only after his death was his purpose in life discovered. His writing, largely ignored during his life, captured audiences and intrigued young writers, so that an entire publishing house can survive almost entirely on his legacy.

But the writing's weird, and psychologists have a field day with it. It's visionary, but reflects fear.

I would love to discount the syphilis for the sake of this topic, but alas, that would be an injustice. However, I thought it worth noting that, in this case, gender-bending contributed to heavy moral conflict, literary brilliance, and the eventual decline of that turbulent sense of genius.

I'm not sure there's actually an issue here to argue, but I did want to throw it out there for the general forum.

thanx kindly,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

------------------
Take a side you say, it's black and gray. And all the hunters take the hunted merrily out to play. We are one, you say, but who are you? You're all too busy reaping in the things you never sown. And this feast must go on and on and on .... Nobody gives a damn. (Floater; "Beast")

[This message has been edited by tiassa (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

Boris,

I would have to say that someone without any sex organs, is asexual, or rather does not have a gender, or is able to have sex, as in sexual intercourse. They may be intimate I'm sure, but one can be intimate with different genders in different ways. I guess my real question would be who cares??? I'm not sure what this has to do with the price of beans????

And AS WELL, I've never said that one's mind is NOT the determinate of one's sexuality. As a matter of fact, I'm arguing that it IS the major influence or determinate?????? I said that homosexuality or hetero or whatever narrow category you would CHOOSE to place yourself in, is determined by ones perceptions. Perceptions are defined in one's mind. I read over your post on the homo string last night, and my head starting spinning round and round as if I were trying to read a quantum physics textbook, so I gave it a rest and thought I'd read it again tonight, and I'm sure again, and again, and again, and again, as I usually do when you start that "walking talking library" thing you've got going. But I swear, I don't think that we are thinking all that differently here????? It still seems to me that you are trying to say that one can not change their mind, and I'm saying that one can change their mind???

------------------
"Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 10, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

Interesting... Intersexed individuals (hermaphrodites and those born without clearly defined genitalia) do exist and recent studies of such individuals do seem to shed some light on this subject. (I will use labels for ease of discussion)... .

In the past, there were cases where parents had been asked (usually shortly after the child's birth) to "choose" a sex for their intersexed child... such a practice of "choosing" at an early age resulted in many cases of very unhappy, erroneously-sexed adult children.

Recent studies indicate that in such cases, it is best to allow the child to reach an age of sexual maturity in order to allow the child to "inform" parents and doctors about what is termed their "natural" sexuality.

In cases such as these, it was explained that surgical decisions should not be made until the child is at least 15 years of age... an age where it is believed that one is able to determine and express their true gender and sexuality. At that time, through a series of clinical questions, the child would first, and most importantly, identify their "gender" be it male or female. (This is most important because this would determine the goal of the surgery, if the child decided to go through with it). Their "sexuality" would then be determined by a different series of clinical questions.

There are, of course, a number of resulting possibilities... A fifteen year-old who identified themself as "female" and who is sexually attracted to males would be classified as a "heterosexual female." One who identified themself as a "female" and who is sexually attracted to females would be classified as a "lesbian female." One who identified themselves as a "female" and who is strongly sexually attracted to both sexes would be classified as a "bisexual female." (You can take the rest from there)...

Anyway, although the population of such individuals is very small, thus far, their choices concerning gender and sexuality strongly correlates to that which is known about the general population.

Just thought I'd throw this into the mix.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[This message has been edited by truestory (edited February 10, 2000).]

 

Lori,

As everyone has been trying to tell you, sexuality is quite a bit more than a mere choice. No, it is NOT possible to change one's mind about sexuality -- just as it is not possible for a tone-deaf person to change their ability to sing. You have a choice when it comes to specific acts. But you do NOT have a choice when it comes to your personality -- as illustrated by truestory's posting (who, in this case, speaks the truth.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

 

I TOTALLY don't agree with either of you. It IS possible to change your perceptions, and people do it all the time, and I've done it, and I'm telling you that it is NO DIFFERENT regarding sex. The fact is that you guys want sooooooooooo bad for there to be some "genetic" "inherent" "magic" reason for the behavior, and there probably are many physical reasons and emotional and social reasons. Do you want to know why it is that you want to say that it is NOT subject to change????? Because in your little narrow minds, you CHOOSE to LABEL homosexual activity as deviant. Not to everyone, but to yourself. So in that case, you are forced to have to convince yourself that there is some impermeable reason that people CHOOSE to do this, and the fact is that unless you can show me a "homosexual" gene, the basis of your arguement JUST DOESN'T EXIST. The reason that you guys were so quick to label me a bisexual is because of my own perceptions, WHICH HAVE CHANGED LIKE 180 DEGREES IN RECENT YEARS. So there, it is possible and that's how I know it. See, all my life I have labeled homosexual sex as deviant in my mind as well, so I kind of bought into the same theory that you guys are so desparately trying to prove. But then I got saved. And now I see sex for what it really was intended to be. To do that for yourself, you'll have to do the little mental exercise that I've suggested before and take ALL THE SIN OUT OF the concept, the act, and then try to imagine what would be left. The fact is that now I see that we are all sinners, and that none of us are pure in our intentions, and yes, even regarding sex. So in my mind now, I label EVERYONE as deviant in some capacity when it comes to their sexuality, and I don't see homosexual sex as any "worse" than most if not all of the sex that I've had in my life which has been totally 100% hetero. AND it's not because of some loveless sex either. I've had both, and a lot of it, and I KNOW better. Point is that if you chose NOT to label homo sex as deviant, then they and you wouldn't feel like you had to go to such erroneous and ridiculous lengths in your MIND to justify it.

------------------
"Go Jesus, go! Go Jesus, go!"

I finally get to be the cheerleader that I always wanted to be but could not, as I was not a fluff chick.

 

Lori,

Are you talking to me? If so, you are way off-base, madam.

 

Lori,

You are more than off base, you aren't even in the right galaxy!

Now what would drive you to suggest that I (or truestory) consider any type of sex "deviant"?? First of all, I've been trying to take the discussion off sexual conduct altogether, and point it toward <u>sexuality</u> -- which DOES NOT EQUAL ACTS OF SEX. <u>Secondly</u>, I don't believe that homosexualism or bisexualism are deviant! In fact, I've been wearing my keyboard out trying to convince you that both are entirely natural! Come on, take a hint already!

"Homosexual gene"???!!!!! Have you been reading <u>anything</u> I've been posting?! Did I not make it abundantly clear enough that even though there is tentative evidence for genetic influences on sexuality, I believe that sexual orientation is mostly determined developmentally during prenatal development and the early years of childhood?

And I <u>had</u> cited actual scientific studies that find differences in the brains of homosexuals vs. heterosexuals! Not only that, but let me mention that the same brain region (pre-optic area of the thalamus) is also involved in sexuality of other animals? Did you know that there is such a thing as <u>homosexual animals</u>?! Yes, that's right, female rats that jump other female rats; male ones that try to hump other males while ignoring the females. The rat brain shows a high dependance on sexuality of the size of a a portion of the thalamus, called SDN-POA (sexually-dimorphic nucleus of the pre-optic area). That's right, there's even a nucleus in the brain that bears the scientific description of "sexually dimorphic". Get it through your God-struck mind: sexuality is just as innate as "natural sex".

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited February 11, 2000).]