You are abnormal. Just like someone born with two heads, three arms, or twelve toes. You don't create a whole new classification for it. You acknowledge it is an anomaly.

You are abnormal. Just like someone born with two heads, three arms, or twelve toes. You don't create a whole new classification for it. You acknowledge it is an anomaly.

 

And then what??

What is the % of people born with both genitalia vs % who just decide Hey I am a girl instead of a guy?

 

I will also say in my opinion, like I have many times, just because someone says something that does not make it true. It only makes that person wrong if not true. Some of my biggest mistakes have been believing a lie. And lies are the biggest misinformation that can be put out.

You are abnormal. Just like someone born with two heads, three arms, or twelve toes. You don't create a whole new classification for it. You acknowledge it is an anomaly.

 

If a child is born with both sex organs, we should tell them while growing up, "now little Johnny, you're not normal"?

 

Question for ya...Does it stop at gender anomalies or does it extent to all anomalies and deformities? What about those with mental deformities, or disabilities? Do you consider those with Down's to be abnormal?

 

Maybe I'm reading too much into your posts, but it sure seems like you're saying someone that is abnormal, as you say, should be treated differently than those of us lucky enough to be normal.

 

In your eyes I'm abnormal because I was born with a deformity/defect (no not pertaining to sex organs, etc.) that has since been corrected through surgery. Sure glad the people I grew up with didn't share your views and treated me the same as all the "normal" kids.

You are reading too much into it. The medical profession recognizes anomalies. These are things that deviate from the standard, normal, expectation for humans. When a baby is born the attending nurses and physicians do a check of the externals. They count limbs, digits, etc. The nurses tell the parents who are present at the birth, "She has all her toes and fingers. Everything looks fine." And the parents breathe a sigh of relief. If any of these things are outside the expected outcome, this is an anomaly. Your baby's pediatrician will look at that to see if there are further health issues that will need to be addressed.

 

It is a technical designation because doctors are trying to determine if there are health risks to the child and if any further medical action needs to be taken. This is all I am talking about. I am not talking about how you handle the situation once it is assessed and the person may have special needs. But I do know, if your child has special needs, you don't want them treated as every other child is treated by medical personnel, their school, public building codes, etc. You want their special needs to be addressed. You do want the general public and classmates to treat them as a person of dignity even if the other kids recognize there are some things that are not "normal." These are two completely different things--how you relate to a person who may have an anomaly as a human being and how you want your doctor to relate to them and their health needs as a health professional.

 

This discussion has to do whether there are more classifications for human beings than male and female. There are none. There are times when abnormalities occur for various reasons. These, you want to have a physician to attend to and address. If this was normal, the physician would have no concern and there would be no reason to further address the circumstance.

 

You do not add another classification for the human species because there may be an occasional anomaly. It is simply recognized as an abnormality. I am sorry that the terms have a negative connotation due to some uses of it. They also have a perfectly respectable neutral connotation, as I am using them in a non-specific discussion of human classification. Can you give me the benefit of the doubt that I know how to relate kindly to people with special needs or who have some form of deformity, retardation, or other anomaly? I do have some practice at this, BTW. My retarded Aunt was not "normal" but she sure was special and loved.

Several of the studies from articles suggested by TBG referred to a baby born with some form of multiple genitalia are considered to have birth defects not classified as deformities or retardation or abnormality or anomalies. The hard decision for parents is how to determine the sex of the child because so much of this reconstruction for the child's sex organs is begun at 2-4 months and numerous other surgeries at less than one year of age. The theory being that this be done before any kind of awareness in the child. My question is since the physical body was conflicting, how do parents know they are correct in choosing a sex? Should they request some kind of DNA confirmation. A wrong guess could present at puberty with a child who has been of the opposite sex all along.

Just to be clear... a birth defect is an anomaly or abnormality.

 

Definition from dictionary.com

 

birth defect n.

A physiological or structural abnormality that develops at or before birth and is present at the time of birth, especially as a result of faulty development, infection, heredity, or injury. Also called congenital anomaly.

 

The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary

Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

=======================

 

What Sportsaholic Mamaw describes is heart-rending. Somehow, you would take your doctors best recommendations and try to make a decision. I think the idea is that you do this sort of thing early before the child has a history. Perhaps DNA testing could aid in this decision. I am sure there have been technological advances that may aid in the decision compared to when I first heard about this sort of thing.

Related article: Judge in Texas temporarily blocks Obama'''s transgender rules

And when I was growing up, there were 2...I need to see the list...insanity is correct!

 

And there were 4 TV channels and the Wizard of Oz and the Ten Commandments showed 1 time per year and if you missed it, you waited until next year. Times change. People adapt -- or go extinct.

You are reading too much into it. The medical profession recognizes anomalies. These are things that deviate from the standard, normal, expectation for humans. When a baby is born the attending nurses and physicians do a check of the externals. They count limbs, digits, etc. The nurses tell the parents who are present at the birth, "She has all her toes and fingers. Everything looks fine." And the parents breathe a sigh of relief. If any of these things are outside the expected outcome, this is an anomaly. Your baby's pediatrician will look at that to see if there are further health issues that will need to be addressed.

 

It is a technical designation because doctors are trying to determine if there are health risks to the child and if any further medical action needs to be taken. This is all I am talking about. I am not talking about how you handle the situation once it is assessed and the person may have special needs. But I do know, if your child has special needs, you don't want them treated as every other child is treated by medical personnel, their school, public building codes, etc. You want their special needs to be addressed. You do want the general public and classmates to treat them as a person of dignity even if the other kids recognize there are some things that are not "normal." These are two completely different things--how you relate to a person who may have an anomaly as a human being and how you want your doctor to relate to them and their health needs as a health professional.

 

This discussion has to do whether there are more classifications for human beings than male and female. There are none. There are times when abnormalities occur for various reasons. These, you want to have a physician to attend to and address. If this was normal, the physician would have no concern and there would be no reason to further address the circumstance.

 

You do not add another classification for the human species because there may be an occasional anomaly. It is simply recognized as an abnormality. I am sorry that the terms have a negative connotation due to some uses of it. They also have a perfectly respectable neutral connotation, as I am using them in a non-specific discussion of human classification. Can you give me the benefit of the doubt that I know how to relate kindly to people with special needs or who have some form of deformity, retardation, or other anomaly? I do have some practice at this, BTW. My retarded Aunt was not "normal" but she sure was special and loved.

 

Read B-Ball-Fan's post above more carefully. You don't appear to intend any malice in your posts, but repeated use of the term "abnormal" and now introducing the term "retarded" above suggests you are clinging to the past rather than embracing the future. You may deride the "politically correct" society we live in all you want, but when you choose to use these terms and people are hurt or offended by them, that is a choice you have made to elevate your right to use those terms (which you clearly can avoid) over their feelings. So be it.

Read B-Ball-Fan's post above more carefully. You don't appear to intend any malice in your posts, but repeated use of the term "abnormal" and now introducing the term "retarded" above suggests you are clinging to the past rather than embracing the future. You may deride the "politically correct" society we live in all you want, but when you choose to use these terms and people are hurt or offended by them, that is a choice you have made to elevate your right to use those terms (which you clearly can avoid) over their feelings. So be it.

 

I agree with you.

 

And no judgements from me, but I was stunned that someone with a handicapped family member would use the word "retarded" to describe them.

And there were 4 TV channels and the Wizard of Oz and the Ten Commandments showed 1 time per year and if you missed it, you waited until next year. Times change. People adapt -- or go extinct.

 

Yep...such a brilliant analogy...if we don't go from 2 genders to 21, we will be extinct before you know it...seriously?? It is amazing the human race survived for thousands of years calling its children boys and girls...its a good thing the brilliant minds in North Carolina saved us just in the nick of time from extinction...:lol2::lol2:

Read B-Ball-Fan's post above more carefully. You don't appear to intend any malice in your posts, but repeated use of the term "abnormal" and now introducing the term "retarded" above suggests you are clinging to the past rather than embracing the future. You may deride the "politically correct" society we live in all you want, but when you choose to use these terms and people are hurt or offended by them, that is a choice you have made to elevate your right to use those terms (which you clearly can avoid) over their feelings. So be it.

 

I agree with you.

 

And no judgements from me, but I was stunned that someone with a handicapped family member would use the word "retarded" to describe them.

 

I can agree with you regarding the use of the term retarded. That was bad and my wife bent my ear about it. I apologize. Again, there are neutral connotations and bad connotations with the term. Unfortunately, usage in the last decades has made the term a very negative term. I was using the term according to its definition not in its slang usage. Again, I can easily avoid it and if I had not been in such a hurry I would have come up with a better phrasing.

 

But the terms "abnormal," "anomaly" and the like I think are perfectly fine in the way I was using them. Particularly, in the discussion I was having I was trying to be descriptive to be understood and in fact was struggling with how to express myself so I would be understood. I think the term birth defect is more in line with what I was looking for and it was supplied by Sportsaholic Mamaw. That seems to be the more appropriate term for the situation that was introduced by another poster. But again, according to the dictionary, a birth defect is a type of abnormality or anomaly.

 

Thanks, @jpa2825, for giving me the benefit of the doubt. I will take the caution and try to find better ways to phrase things if I think that one way may be offensive to someone else and there is another way to say it without effecting clarity. Of course, I can't help it if what I regard to be true is found offensive to another. For instance, in this discussion about whether human sex categories should be broadened beyond male and female.