Originally posted by VIKINGANT
I have a cousin that when she was born could have gone either way and her parents made the choice based on the apparent dominant features. They
regretted it for a ling time and she has gone through hell with surgeries and other personal matters for years.
I think they obviously made a mistake in your cousins case. But that is because they assumed the "dominant physical features" were an accurate
indication of how the brain would be "sexualized." More modern studies, such as the one I linked to, indicate that physical gender and gender
identity, (brain gender) happen at different times for different reasons. Now days, a wise doctor would recommend waiting to see how the child
perceived themself. Odds are, your cousin would have been equally happy to be a male who likes females as she is a female who likes females.
I am glad it worked out for her, and that she can accept being in a female body while holding a sexual preference for females, and generally being
more male in mindset. However, had it been the opposite way around, my guess is that she would not be so happy.
Had she been born sexually ambiguous, and they decided to make her a male, and she had been "female" in her brain, sexually attracted to males, my
guess is she would be incredibly unhappy. It is far, far less socially acceptable to be an effeminate gay male in our society, than to be a "gay"
female. She would have had to deal with enormous negative social pressure. (Although in your cousins case I dont think "gay" is the right term.
They botched her assignment at birth. Probably because it was easier for them to make the female bits out of what she was born with. She is a
straight male trapped in a womans body at this point.)
Women can easily get by with wearing pants, liking sports, science, "guy" things, and society doesnt blink an eye. Tomboys are accepted as that,
tomboys, and they are usually given lots of encouragement for it. No one has ever even questioned if I was gay, because there is no assumption that
tomboys have to be, and in, fact I am not. Im just not a "girly girl."
But if a man is even the slightest bit "effeminate," he is automatically gay. Even if he isnt, he will be accused of it. And if he does happen to
really be gay, he really gets it. A man who wears dresses, and likes girly things, now thats a huge problem for a lot of people. They suffer
physical abuse, emotional abuse, job discrimination, rejection from their own families, and so on. I really feel for gay men. How anyone can assume
some guy "chooses" to be a male homosexual and suffer that level of abuse is beyond me.
I think the more modern approach is a good one. They find out how the child identifies them self, delay puberty until a reasonable age to ensure they
are certain, begin appropriate hormone therapy to ensure that their bodies develop in harmony with their gender identity, and then reassign their sex
organs when they reach the age of 18 in most cases and sometimes younger if the case merits it, (as in Kim Petras case). Unfortunately, cases like
your cousin are a large part of the reason they figured out that gender identity and anatomy are not always correlated.
[edit on 5-2-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]