Gender Assignment Surgery

[Cynus]

For the T's. Lets fight this.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/06/26/infant_gender_assignment_unnecessary_and_potentially_harmful.html

[Graeme]

Sorry, I gave up partway through the article. It's so over the top and extreme, it makes having a sensible discussion impossible. The idea that it's the doctor's fault for determining the sex of the child is ridiculous.

Working on the edges of the healthcare industry, I understand the medical difference between 'sex' and 'gender'. The doctor is assigning the 'sex' of the child, not the gender. Society assumes that the gender will be the same as the sex until shown otherwise -- which is what transgender is all about. You can't tell if a child is transgender at birth! If the objection is assuming gender is the same as sex, then blame society, not the doctors. In the medical field, a doctor needs to know if a person is male or female sexually, because there are some treatments that are contraindicated for one sex and not the other.

As an aside, there's a medical condition for neo-natals where the sex of the child isn't identified until up to three weeks after birth. So much for the doctors doing this as 'routine'. There's also the XXY chromosome pattern that's a medical condition that can sometimes require additional medical intervention after birth. These are things that I didn't see mentioned in that over-hyped article.

As for the stupid comment in the article about boys can be doctors and girls can be nurses, the author of the article is clearly ignorant. There are multiple counter examples, including one of the very popular Bernstein Bears kids books that emphasises repetitively that the only thing that the sex decides is who will be a father and who will be a mother. For everything else, the sex doesn't matter as to what occupation or interests the baby will have in later life. If the author thinks that society tells them otherwise, that's not the fault of the doctors and nurses -- that's the fault of society.

Overall (and I didn't finish the article because there was too much rubbish in it), if you believe there's an issue then it's in society's implicit assumption that sex equals gender. Fix that assumption, not the medical staff that necessarily need to identify the sex of the child so appropriate medical treatments can be conducted in the future.

[Cole Parker]

What we have here is an article based on emotion and a rebuttal based on fact. Easy enough to be swayed by both, but which one will resonate more deeply with you speaks to who you are.

Well said, Graeme.

C

[Cynus]

It's entirely possible that I read the article in a different mindset than I have now. I had just had an argument where I was defending my transgendered friend and was pretty emotionally worked up when I came across the article. So, I shared this off of emotion.

[Graeme]

Cynus, transgender issues are very important. Trying to educate people about the challenges involved and how to approach the issues with compassion and acceptance is important. That article, however, put me off side as soon as I worked out what they were trying to say...and I don't consider myself someone who has a lot of prejudices.

The article was simply pointing the finger in what I consider to be an obscenely wrong direction. There's definitely a finger to be pointed, because society doesn't deal well with transgender individuals, but pointing the finger at the wrong group of people doesn't help.

Now, as a way to start a discussion, it's fine I'm happy to have a discussion, because transgender youths are in a difficult position. Working out what can be done to help them is something I support. If that's what comes from that article, then that's great. If people start trying to stop doctors and nurses from recording the sex (not gender) of a patient, though, I'd be very concerned.

[The Pecman]

I agree completely with Graeme -- well-said.