Does your opinion on circumcision also apply to this?

[LindyHopper]

Mostly because I think it would be interesting to get both the pro- and anti-circumcision folks' opinion on this one... 😀

Ambiguous genitalia is a birth defect that makes it unclear whether an affected newborn is a girl or a boy. The baby seems to have a mixture of both female and male parts. This condition occurs approximately once in every 4,500 births.

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/...irth_defects_ambiguous_genitalia?OpenDocument

In addition to parental and child counseling and hormone therapy, the main treatment option in this situation is surgery. In most cases, this means cutting off the "extra" and raising the child as a girl. Parents generally receive a lot of pressure from both doctor and family to elect this surgery shortly after birth, to give the child a better chance at having a normal childhood. However, the intersex community often advocates delaying any surgery until the child is old enough to decide what gender s/he wishes to be.

In my eyes, the question of whether or not to surgically "correct" ambiguous genitalia shortly after birth is a much bigger deal than whether or not to circumcise a male infant. Not only are you cutting off a lot of nerve endings, often creating an individual unable to achieve an orgasm; you also risk surgically selecting the "wrong" gender, creating an individual who feels s/he is "trapped" in a wrong-sex body (gender identity disorder). On the other hand, the consequences of delaying surgery also loom large, because you're choosing to raise a child as gender-undecided for however many years, which is enormously difficult for parents, child, and pretty much everyone else they encounter.

So... what do you think? Cut or don't cut?

 

[Marquis De Sade]

So... what do you think? Cut or don't cut?

Whatever makes for better sex.

 

[LindyHopper]

Whatever makes for better sex.

Well, that would be "don't cut." Ambiguous genitalia look weird, but intact, should be as sexually responsive as normal genitalia. Surgery has a high risk of destroying this permanently.

 

[Marquis De Sade]

Well, that would be "don't cut." Ambiguous genitalia look weird, but intact, should be as sexually responsive as normal genitalia. Surgery has a high risk of destroying this permanently.

Yay for no snippity snip!!

 

[LindyHopper]

Apparently though, in cases like those they mostly end up carrying more female DNA then male. So, many go for the female route.

Actually, DNA isn't, and shouldn't be, the overriding factor. For example, there's the case of androgen insensitivity syndrome, in which XY individuals whose bodies do not respond to testosterone are born looking like women, grow up looking like women, and feel like normal women. Since nothing seems to be wrong, it's usually not until she never gets her menstrual period that a medical exam indicates that she lacks a uterus and ovaries and that her vagina ends in a blind pouch. The doctor may not even tell her about her condition, other than the fact that she can't have children.

The reason most surgical corrections go in the female direction is simply because it's easier to cut off the "extra" than to surgically construct a penis and testicles.

But because I've not been in that kind of situation (thank God), I am no one to sit here and try and judge for a decision that I know has got to be hellacious to try to make.

I don't intend this thread to judge - I don't actually know anyone who's had to make this incredibly difficult decision. But like any birth defect, this situation could happen to any new parent, and it doesn't hurt to think about what you might do and why.

 

[Redmage]

Gender identity is over-rated. I think if the child is made aware of what's going on and why, the difficulties can be mitigated until the person most affected by the surgery is able to offer some coherent input into the decision.

By way of demonstration, note the lack of gender pronouns in this message.

 

[MasterPaladin]

I don't know much about this but can't they tell if ovaries are present in the infant? if yes then girl and isn't one genitalia a little more developed than the other I was always under the impression it was.

 

[Dussicar]

I want to say No, just wait until he/she's old enough to be able to tell what he/she looks more predominantly like. But on the other hand I could just chalk it up to the fact that there's more of a possibility of it being a girl and then snip the boy area.

Gender identity is over-rated. I think if the child is made aware of what's going on and why, the difficulties can be mitigated until the person most affected by the surgery is able to offer some coherent input into the decision.

Because this thread completely took me off guard, I'm going to have to concur with Crystal and Red as I don't even THINK I can truly form an opinion on this.

These responses just seems to make the most sense to me.

 

[LD_Tickler]

There's a school of thought, expressed largely in the writing of Anne Fausto-Sterling, arguing that the idea of surgical correction to conform with one gender or another is conceptually faulty

She argues that there's no reason for ambiguous/hermaphroditic sex to not be considered another gender, and that the male/female dichotomy is an arbitrary system. In one of her earlier works, she suggests (kind of tongue-in-cheek) that there could be seven genders.

 

[GodlessTickler]

While I think surgery probobly isn't the best option, I can see valid arguments on both sides. I usually would want to let someone make their own choice about gender there are some massive social consiquences to being a person of ambiguous gender. None the less, it hardly makes sense to not let someone make that choice for themselves as long as the danger is minimal.

Circumcision in contrast is a brutal mutilation of a childs sex organ for essentially no reason.

 

[Amnesiac]

What you're referring to is called mosaicism and it is an issue largely because our culture has stringently defined gender roles and we don't know what to make of anything in the middle.

Today, there's a substantial population of what's known as "intersex" individuals in the LGBT movement, and most of the people in it argue, in my opinion quite understandably, that gender is more fluid than previously thought. Considering how gender roles have changed so much in the last 200 years, I don't see why gender itself can't be more pliable than we thought.

IMO, don't fix it if you don't know it's broken. An intersex child is going to have a difficult enough time dealing with their feelings of identity alone...but coping with a surgically-induced change as well? Even worse. Especially if the surgery made them a predominant gender that they can't relate to.

It'd make for a difficult upbringing...but then again, parenthood isn't a walk in the park is it? And consider how much that "hands-off" decision will affect the bond between you and the child when they reach adolescence/adulthood? Letting someone make their own decisions on an issue of identity is one hell of a great way to form trust.

 

[MrMacphisto]

There was a good House episode on this.

Anyway, I think I'm gonna have to go with what Crystal mentioned. If the child has more female DNA, then that's probably the right gender to select.

 

[LD_Tickler]

There was a good House episode on this.

Anyway, I think I'm gonna have to go with what Crystal mentioned. If the child has more female DNA, then that's probably the right gender to select.

DNA isn't necessarily going to manifest itself physically to the traits that make somebody perceive them self as male or female. So while that might be one of the more simple, quantitative criterion for decision making, it doesn't fully address the problems.

 

[MrMacphisto]

DNA isn't necessarily going to manifest itself physically to the traits that make somebody perceive them self as male or female. So while that might be one of the more simple, quantitative criterion for decision making, it doesn't fully address the problems.

True... There are many times where I've thought Jamie Lee Curtis should've been a boy. (she was born under the conditions mentioned in the OP)

 

[Redmage]

There was a good House episode on this.

Anyway, I think I'm gonna have to go with what Crystal mentioned. If the child has more female DNA, then that's probably the right gender to select.

Why? Considering that there are women with nothing but female DNA who elect to undergo surgical and hormonal transformation to men?

It's not clear to me however that this idea of "more female DNA" has any real meaning. In cases of mosaicism, you can't easily say one way or the other, because a simple genetic test won't tell you what percentage of the person's cells are male vs female. Androgen insensitivity syndrome can cause ambiguous genitalia, but in those cases the child's DNA is almost always pure XY - male. The only case in which I can clearly see meaning for "more female DNA" is Kleinfelter's syndrome, in which the child has an extra X-chromosome, but the genetic presentation in those cases is nearly always male. So before you base your decision on this concept you might want to make sure you know what it really means.

Even assuming that the concept of "more female DNA" has any meaning, genetics is not destiny. The fact that even "pure" females opt for sex change suggests that in ambiguous cases it's better to wait.

 

[MrMacphisto]

Why? Considering that there are women with nothing but female DNA who elect to undergo surgical and hormonal transformation to men?

It's not clear to me however that this idea of "more female DNA" has any real meaning. In cases of mosaicism, you can't easily say one way or the other, because a simple genetic test won't tell you what percentage of the person's cells are male vs female. Androgen insensitivity syndrome can cause ambiguous genitalia, but in those cases the child's DNA is almost always pure XY - male. The only case in which I can clearly see meaning for "more female DNA" is Kleinfelter's syndrome, in which the child has an extra X-chromosome, but the genetic presentation in those cases is nearly always male. So before you base your decision on this concept you might want to make sure you know what it really means.

Even assuming that the concept of "more female DNA" has any meaning, genetics is not destiny. The fact that even "pure" females opt for sex change suggests that in ambiguous cases it's better to wait.

Whoa dude... don't take it personal. I'll take your word for it.

 

[ViperGTS]

Leave both - that way the boy/girl can enjoy getting nailed doggy style AND get a reach-around. Double win!

 

[Icycle]

I don't know much about this but can't they tell if ovaries are present in the infant? if yes then girl and isn't one genitalia a little more developed than the other I was always under the impression it was.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Sometimes there will be both an ovary and a testis, or gonads that are a mixture of both. And regarding the genitalia, the isn't a lot of difference between a very large clitoris and a very small penis.

We are conditioned to believe that sex is a very rigid, binary category: male and female. But the biology has a lot more shades of grey than most people understand or realize. In many cases of ambiguous genitalia, there is no clear-cut criterion by which to assign a gender at birth.

It wasn't that long ago that even modern, developed countries, if a baby was born with an enlarged clitoris, the doctors would chop it off without even the fully informed knowledge or consent of the parents.

Personally, I believe that surgical gender assignment of ambiguous genitals should happen only when the child is old enough to give meaningful informed consent, if at all.

 

[Dussicar]

Personally, I believe that surgical gender assignment of ambiguous genitals should happen only when the child is old enough to give meaningful informed consent, if at all.

After all is said and done, I still believe that this is the best course of action.

Not to be too sweeping, but this situation is way out of the "norm's" league.

The person in question will have dealt with a very difficult and confusing upbringing. Their thoughts are their own. They will have to do their best to make (ultimately) THE best out of a socially akward situation.

 

[Ticklerguy4u]

Most people may experiences an identity crisis when they are younger even if they are sure of their physical gender. A boy growing up may feel he is not "man" enough or a girl may feel she is not "woman" enough to satisfy society's standards.

In my opinion, deciding early on is the most efficient way to avoid any confusion as the child grows up and it is the responsibility of the parents to ensure that the child is treated more like a person rather then forcing gender stereotypes..like pink or blue pajamas.

Buy clothes that are more gender neutral such as jeans, no suits or dresses. Possibly the person may grow up believing that what they stare at in the mirror is who they are and it's okay to be a bit tomboyish for a girl or a bit sensitive for a boy. Of course, when they grow more mature the truth will have to be revealed so that the child could understand why certain desires and emotions evolve but then again..it may not because he or she just accepts who they are as a person and not so much a gender and they will dress and look as they want and not feel any shame about it.

 

[SapphireRose]

There's a school of thought, expressed largely in the writing of Anne Fausto-Sterling, arguing that the idea of surgical correction to conform with one gender or another is conceptually faulty

She argues that there's no reason for ambiguous/hermaphroditic sex to not be considered another gender, and that the male/female dichotomy is an arbitrary system. In one of her earlier works, she suggests (kind of tongue-in-cheek) that there could be seven genders.

Years ago, when I was still in highschool, this was actually brought up in my psychology class. There are technically, by medical standards, seven (or maybe five?) seperate genders. I tried to find the information and thier names, but don't really know what to look for and what I come up with is more "psychological gender" than anything else (hetero-male, homo-male, hetero-female, homo-female...etc.)

But due to the medical advantages, the "other" genders don't "show up" as often as in third-world countries and the other-world tribes that still exist to this day.

I'll do some more research and see what I can dig up. That's what I'm really good at.

As for the original post, I really don't know what I would chose to do if in a situation where my newborn child was born with both sides of things. Growing up would be hard for them either way, whether I chose to change them when they were unawares and told them when they could understand or wait until they could make the decision themselves.

It does make me reflect on what Amnesiac said though. We are so involved in gender-roles, despite the new awareness brought to our attention. Most are still stuck, especially in the older generation, that guys marry girls, girls marry guys, women stay in the kitchen and at home and men support the family. It's amazing how pig-headed some people still are despite the resources to better themselves around them being so readily available.

Is ignorance really bliss?

 

[..Glamorous..]

I know exactly what I'd do.

Call me a bad person or whatever the fuck you want,


But I'd cut and shut my fucking mouth about it.

 

[Redmage]

Whoa dude... don't take it personal. I'll take your word for it.

Personal?

 

[Icycle]

I know exactly what I'd do.

Call me a bad person or whatever the fuck you want,


But I'd cut and shut my fucking mouth about it.

Even if that means you could be permantly depriving you child of the ability to ever achieve orgasm? And what if your child had been exposed to enough testosterone in the womb to lay down a male foundation in the brain. In that case your child may very well develop a male gender identity regardless of the surgically amd socially assigned gender. He may be very upset when he realizes what happened to his genitals.

I'm not trying to be judgemental here. These are very real possibilities, and they are part if the reason many transgender advocates oppose gender assigent surgery for infants.

 

[..Glamorous..]

Even if that means you could be permantly depriving you child of the ability to ever achieve orgasm? And what if your child had been exposed to enough testosterone in the womb to lay down a male foundation in the brain. In that case your child may very well develop a male gender identity regardless of the surgically amd socially assigned gender. He may be very upset when he realizes what happened to his genitals.

I'm not trying to be judgemental here. These are very real possibilities, and they are part if the reason many transgender advocates oppose gender assigent surgery for infants.

Let me elaborate.

I would choose whatever gender specific parts were healthy, If the child chooses to be an opposite gender when they are older, I will fully support them in anyway possible. I have a child, I know how hard of a decision this would be.

I'm glad your not trying to be judgmental but seriously, If I chose to wait until the child decided, but someone at school caught wind that said child was both sexes. I mean seriously, those kids would have a field day and the child would suffer either way.

I rather nip it in the bud, and deal with it later. Either way you will have consequences. I don't see any way of this, NOT causing a problem for the child.