Comment (37)
Email
Print
del.icio.us
TechnoratiYour gender is not an accident
The idea of medical intervention to change one's sex has gained credibility in recent years. Dr Rick Fitzgibbons thinks that it has been a great mistake.
When a man wants to be a woman, or a woman a man, is it because nature gave them the wrong body? Or did something else go wrong?The idea that a person's sex is a mere biological accident that can be changed to suit one's chosen gender has wide currency today. But, according to psychiatrist Richard Fitzgibbons, this intellectual fad is not at all helpful to people who are genuinely confused about their sexual identity.
Dr Fitzgibbons, who has nearly 30 years' clinical experience behind him, is the director of a private practice outside Philadelphia and leads the team of the Institute for Marital Healing. He has made a specialty of forgiveness therapy in the resolution of excessive anger, and has co-authored a book on the subject with Robert D. Enright, published by the American Psychological Association.
In this interview with MercatorNet he explains why a sex-change operation is not the answer to gender identity problems.
MercatorNet: Are there people who are genuinely confused about their sexual identity—whether they are male or female?Rick Fitzgibbons: Yes, there are people who are confused due to the seriousness of their emotional pain and conflicts which interfere with cognitive functioning. Many of these individuals have failed to embrace the goodness and beauty of their masculinity or femininity in childhood and in adolescence for numerous reasons.
Unless treated properly, they may go on to hate their masculinity and femininity. Their sadness and lack of acceptance by peers or a parent can lead them to believe that they may be able to escape from their emotional pain and find greater happiness, acceptance and confidence being of the opposite sex.
MercatorNet: It is possible to have a female person "inside" a male body, and vice versa?
Fitzgibbons: No, it is not. A person may feel this way because of emotionally painful experiences primarily with those of the same sex. Initially, they fantasise living as someone of the opposite sex in an attempt to escape from their pain. An excessive fantasy life then can lead to cross-dressing, to a greater identification with the opposite sex and even to a delusional belief that one is of the opposite sex.
MercatorNet: Can a person's sex be changed — surgically or in any way?
Fitzgibbons: No, each cell of a person's body contains chromosomes which identify that individual as either male or female. It is not simply a question of different genitals. Before birth prenatal hormones shape the brains of boys to be different from those of girls. Mutilating surgery and hormone treatments can create the appearance of a male or female body, but it cannot change the underlying reality. It is not possible to change a person's sex.
MercatorNet: What do follow-up studies show in regard to sex-change surgery?
Fitzgibbons: Dr Paul McHugh reported in an article in First Things that when he was the psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins, he studied the outcomes of such surgeries. The study found that while most of the clients said they were happy with the outcome, the various psychological problems which accompanied their feeling that they were the other sex remained unchanged. They still had the same difficulties with relationships, work and emotions. Dr McHugh concluded that "to provide a surgical alteration to the body of these unfortunate people was to collaborate with a mental disorder rather than to treat it."
MercatorNet: What are the reasons why people seek to change their sex?Fitzgibbons: The most common causes are a lack of acceptance and rejection in childhood and adolescence by peers and by the parent of the same sex, deep resentment toward these individuals, hatred of their bodies, intense fears of being betrayed and hurt, and a deep desire to be protected in the world. Less common causes are rejection by the parent of the opposite sex and the belief that if they were of the opposite sex they would receive the warmth and love from that parent which they did not receive as children.
A less common conflict is seen in some boys and men who have powerful artistic and creative gifts, which lead them to experience a strong attraction to the beauty in the female world and to an identification with femininity. This artistic response can begin early in childhood and can lead to a desire to be female. In rare cases, a parent wants a child to be of the opposite sex and dresses and treats the child as being of the opposite sex.
Finally, many of those who seek surgical “sex change” suffered from undiagnosed and untreated gender identity disorder (GID) as children.
MercatorNet: Can these emotional conflicts be successfully treated? Does the desire for sex-change surgery change after such treatment?
Fitzgibbons: Yes, it is important not to take the desire for sex change surgery at face value, but to uncover the emotional conflict which has led people to think they would be happier or safer as the other sex. The recognition of emotional pain with peers or with a parent leads to the awareness of significant anger which can be resolved through a process of forgiveness. At the same time it is necessary to treat poor body image, low self-esteem, sadness and fears.
As with the treatment of substance abuse disorders, spirituality can play an important role in the healing process. We regularly recommend that Catholic patients work with a spiritual director. Also, in those with faith a major goal of treatment is to help individuals to see accept their unique masculinity and femininity as a positive gift from God.
As the emotional conflicts are treated effectively the appreciation for one's unique and special personhood increases. Subsequently, the desire for sex change surgery is resolved.
MercatorNet: How can parents identify gender identity disorder? Can it be successfully treated in childhood?
Fitzgibbons: Gender identity symptoms include strong cross gender identification, exclusive cross-gender play, a lack of same-sex friends and cross-dressing. Children with these symptoms should be treated as though something may be very wrong (link to my GID article at http://www.narth.com). Parents and paediatricians should not minimize or overlook these serious symptoms.
The psychiatric literature clearly demonstrates that children with GID can be successfully treated if both parents cooperate in the solution, especially fathers. According to Dr Kenneth Zucker and Susan Bradley, experts in the treatment of gender identity problems in children, treatment should begin as soon as possible. I have an article on this subject on the website of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality.
MercatorNet: Last year the Guardian newspaper in Britain
commissioned a review of more than 100 international studies of
post-operative transsexuals, after interviewing people who regretted
having such surgery, and this research found no robust evidence that
the surgery is clinically effective. Why do some scientists insist,
even against the evidence, that sex can be changed? What is the bigger
issue at stake here?Fitzgibbons: In spite of the scientific research, the support for the idea of "sex change" operations has continued to grow. In fact, there have been several articles discussing whether it is advisable to begin the "sex change" process in adolescence or even before.
I have personally had the clinical experience recently where a troubled mother found support from two child psychiatrists at different major East Coast university medical centres to begin transitioning her nine-year-old son to a female. Fortunately, the judicial system blocked this medical recommendation, warned the mother and gave primary custody of this boy to his father.
Dr Paul McHugh, whom I referred to earlier, has summed up the philosophy behind this mindset well: "One might expect that those who claim that sexual identity has no biological or physical basis would bring forth more evidence to persuade others. But as I've learned, there is a deep prejudice in favor of the idea that nature is totally malleable. Without any fixed position on what is given in human nature, any manipulation of it can be defended as legitimate. A practice that appears to give people what they want — and what some of them are prepared to clamour for — turns out to be difficult to combat with ordinary professional experience and wisdom. Even controlled trials or careful follow-up studies to ensure that the practice itself is not damaging are often resisted and the results rejected."
People are coming to believe that they can create, use, change and destroy life as they so choose.
Carolyn Moynihan is deputy editor of MercatorNet.
Thanks to everyone who contributed to this debate.
This article is now closed to comments.
MVC you are incorrect again. The original sex is indeed a result of a grand total of m vs. f influences and expressions on the body. Also, I think you need to look up DE-differentiation and RE-differentiation. Also, an XY cell can indeed be sex changed in the lab (no quotes needed) to a fertile XX cell. Morphology redevelops in response to a sex change operation. Morphology refers to the shape and overall form of the anatomy. Also, when the transsexual recieves ovarian transplants, the (so called, as you would state, original) sex of transplanted ovaries into a transsexual was female. Thus, the transsexual now has 2 distinct genetic lines. It doesn’t matter that skin cells for instance may still be XY, because she now has ovaries from the donor which have XX cells. It is really not unlike a chimera state, where some persons have all XY cells, except in their ovaries, which would have been their girl but fused into one chimeric person. In fact, it is INDUCED chimerism, producing a gonadally female who has XX chromosomes in her ovaries now.
to everyone (including the doc):
i’m from the point that the sex of a person is determined by the mind, so as diferent studies show the mind can develop in the uterus to the oposit gender of the body do to hormones in the uterus that may or may not be related to mom hormones. But this doenst stay from here a study involving transexuals have show that brain structures that are diferent in males and females in ftm transexual are exactly as male ones and in mft transexual are exactly as female ones, the study reports that that structures are not bind by hormones so it are hard wierd since the child is born.
And another thing i’m a mtf transexual and i dont have any of that problems that the Dr Rick Fitzgibbons reports. My family is healthy i had have a parent and a mother that tried to raise me as a normal boy, i have brothers and no one of them have a GID or are homossexual. I have always felt like a woman and i have never wiched to be one because i’m one, just have a male body; I dont have problems in relations ships, i still a boy, and have had some boy and girlfriends; I never felt alone or have been put away from the games, played by boys or girls; i’m will start soon hormone theraphy and i just want one thing that is the others aceptt me as a woman.
I’m a woman, as ever i had been, just want to have my social life as it’s suposed to.
The sexual changes that occur in human development are either effects upon or causes of the genetic make up of individuals. Genes determine sexual development as they are influenced and express. Genes do not always express their composition because they can be turned “on” or “off” based on “environmental” or “Genetic rules” factors that determine development and “maintain” the body (this can be defective). Just because a person can turn “on” or “off” those cells that express sexual development (after it has already occurred and “matured") does not mean the body has not already developed as a male or a female. The original sex of an individual is not the grand total of female versus male influences and expressions of the body, but the genetic established development behind those influences. No matter how many influences there are upon the genes, they are the genes that eventually “choose” the sex development to be maintained despite the environment. Once the environmental factors have played their part sex has been established. It is this established sex that i call the body choice and original sex of an individual and xx and xy has a lot to do with it. A man cannot become a women unless they are “redeveloped” (made fetus again) which is absurd. Any procedure that takes place in a lab to “change sex” is fundamentally against the body’s pre-established developmental decision to maintain in the “on” position any of its proper sexual expressions and “off” any of its improper expressions and development. Only accidental changes occur unless a fundamental genetic change takes place. It is important to realize that there is still much to be learned about this “fundamental genetic sexual establishment” that establishes the person as a continual male or female in their life despite influences upon the body.
I am not speaking in a reductionism because the human body is not its exterior environment though it is heavily influenced by it.
Dear MVC, you make some errors. You state
“original sex is not just the XX or XY...but the whole genetic makeups relation to sexual development.”
“original sex is the pre-established genetic influences for development of healthy reproduction.”
“A developed body is a sexual body determined by their genetic makeup.”
“..the facts do not change sex is biologically determined by genetic makeup (influenced positively or negatively as such).”
Here is your problem. I didn’t claim that genetics are not involved in sex or reproduction. But you are being too reductionistic. Genetics DON’T occur in a vacuum and there is no orginal sex or reproduction without the environment either. Furthermore, hormones or environmental factors can change what would have occured by the genetics and override the genetic influence. Persons who have a female original sex as you say, can turn out to be males if there is a different
environmental occurence (exogenous hormones or chemicals affecting the fetus). This changed does not need to be via an effect on the gene expression itself. It may also be changed during assisted reproductive technologies. It may also be changed after a transplant. After all, a m to f transsexual who has received functional transplanted ovaries, now has in effect become a man made chimera, having 2 cell lines. An XY cell, which you would claim has an original male sex, may
be changed in the lab.
Melissa,
maybe we are missing each others points i beg your patience as i sift through all this knowledge…
The facts are simple: Genes are the readout for the development of the body.
Genes play a part in sexual development such that without them no sexual or bodily development occurs at all.
There are many factors in sexual development but the out come is always male female or mal-sexual development (reproductively)
The many factors act upon or in unison with genetic code as sexual developer.
Wether you want to call that the two sex chromo or all the factors that attribute to the genetic sexual make up the facts do not change...sex is biologically determined by the genetic makeup. Influences upon the genetic makeup may change the path of sex development but that path is either male female or mal developed.
Whole body chimera changes none of these facts in light that a developed male is ALL of his sex traits in one sexually genetic body as a female to hers. A developed body is a sexual body determined by their genetic makeup (influenced positively or negatively as such).
Original sex is not just the XX or XY of the genes but the whole genetic makeups relation to sexual development… it is genetic or the body develops without genes (absurd).
The body is a single united organism that has specified organs for specified ends such as the sex traits point towards reproduction. Original sex is the pre-established genetic influences for development of healthy reproduction.
The body cannot be completely genetically changed without “re-development”.
Now a person born with a mal-developed sex is defective in regard to its natural genetic end. That end is to be determined as what would be the case if healthy sexual development had happened or could happen (research needs to be done). mal developed sex is not the norm or healthy expression and is in need of cure for proper biological function begging for answers to why maldevelopment occurs and how to fix it in process.
Dear MVC, I think you misunderstood my entire point about whole body chimerism. My point is, if we are to decide that the ultimate criteria is, XX= female and XY=male, there is no
healing to one’s original sex as you mentioned, since the person actually started as two sexes. Also, the “developmental processes and all its factors” which you mention in whole body chimerism, may not be “factors which are towards one healthy teleology” as you state, if it is a true hermaphrodite chimera.
Also, sex and reproduction, may of course be seperate 9even cloning of humans would be reproduction, but not sex), and that is not just intellectual. They also may be seperate from their original developmental processes.
Also, you equate “male” and “Female” factors “winning out over each other”, original sex and reproduction. But, this is not necessarily the case, as we see in assisted reproductive technologies, for example.
I am not stating that a fully functioning reproductive male
wearing a dress, make-up, or breast implants is “both” sexes.
But certainly, if such a male then got a sex change operation, she would then be undeniably of female phenotypic sex. Hormones could also make lactation and breastfeeding possible. Some m to f transsexuals have received ovarian transplants. Do they not ovulate? The fact that fertility in the new sex has not yet been achieved doesn’t mean that the end result is not the same as someone who is born with a malformed sex either.
I am not arguing there are not other major factors in sexual development but that all those factors that cause male or female development are what makes a person male, female, or mal- sexually developed considering the end of reproduction. Genes have a major role to play in sexual development that cannot be denied. To what extent, may be put into question but without those “male” or “Female” factors “winning out over each other” (original sex) reproduction would not be possible.
I think that the simplistic problem on your argument is that sex is what is “expressed” cutting it off from the complex developmental processes that make sex and reproduction biologically possible. “Whole body chimerism” is not a problem at all because the body either develops Taking all factors into consideration genetic or otherwise as a healthy male, female, or mal-developed sex. Even in an intellectual separation of the sex characteristics from their unified reproductive goals and attempts to change the sex traits as many and as much as possible would not be enough to make a male totally female or a female totally male in an already developed body. They would need to be “reborn”.
It cannot be denied that a male is more than his beard, or his musculature its the combined factors for reproductive functionality. A separation between cause and effect of developmental reproductive sexuality like what your stating as the sex defining criteria, leads to absurd claim that a developed and fully functioning reproductive male, wearing a dress, makeup, or even with breast “implants” (not breasts) is “both” sexes. Sex is not appearance, sexual appearance is the result of healthy or mal sexual development. Another interesting aspect in whole body Chimerism is that the body develops as a male female or mal sexually developed the choice is not the “baby’s” but the developmental process and all its factors that i do not deny which are factors towards one healthy teleology
Dear MVC,
you ask “...at what point is it and what does it to the body that makes it male or female in “normal” development?”
It is not a single point, but a process, starting at fertilization and including puberty. What makes it that way is a combination of chemical factors, including androgens and AMH.
You state, “So the fact remains that a male is a triggered sry fully developed body and a female is a non sry triggered body.”
I disagree. A male or female may be developed by triggering another chemical which all embryos have.
You write, “Human sexual development is not a matter of choice outside of healing oneself to their original sex.”
This is wrong. For instance, a person could have started out as two seperate sexes-one a normal male and the other a normal female. Then, these two early embryos could have fused into one person (whole body chimerism). Since the person was originally a normal male embryo and a normal female embryo, half of their cells are XX, half are XY, they have an ovary, a testis, a uterus, spermatic ducts, and ambiguous genitalia. What is healing themselves to their original sex? Human sexual development is also chosen, either directly or indirectly, through things as DES throuugh the placenta, ART..
You write “Perhaps what your argument can entail is that there are males with XX and females with XY but they ARE either male or female developmentally or genetically with considering of of the factor of the onset or silence of the SRY signal”.
No. There are not XX males or XX females just because of onset or silencing of SRY or SRY related signals. It’s too simplistic. It’s multifactorial. Presence of a phenotype, eg., ovaries, testes, vagina, penis, beard, breasts, arewhat I call sex.
To Melissa
I will not question your genetics know how again! Nonetheless i have to ask you to answer one fundamental question, if the body develops and grows as we all know it does, at what point is it and what does it to the body that makes it male or female in “normal” development? I agree with you that genes are not so cut and dry answers to the sex issue we are discussing, however, in knowing that a male is triggered at some point and that trigger may or may not be “ignited” the may or may not determines the sex and the sex development. So the fact remains that a male is a triggered sry fully developed body and a female is a non sry triggered body. People are either one or the other or a mal-developed of the two in reproductive terms. What ever or where ever the trigger is for sexual development, There is a trigger and it is located in the genetic triggers of the body that may or may not be the exact x or y but an environmental factor upon the code. Do you argue that a male or a female are only that way because of appearance what of development? I doubt that you think it is mere appearance knowing that you know genetic basics. The point is simply that there are male and there are females and there are no other reproductive sexes but only syndromes or mutations that need to have a cure to enable fertility and proper human fetal development. Human sexual development is not a matter of choice outside of healing oneself to there original sex. Perhaps what your argument can entail is that there are males with XX and females with XY but they ARE either male or female developmentally and genetically with considering the factor of the onset or silence of the sry signal. (I ask your pardon with regards to my remark of genetic studies) I do not agree that there is any genetic basis for people to desire transex surgery. You may find an argument for sexual preferences but the desire to become the opposite sex is psychological not genetic developmental factors
MVC
Dear MVC, you are wrong again. I am able to teach many types of classes. There are “XX” males who indeed have the SRY gene translocated and there are “XY” females who indeed have no SRY gene. BUT, there are also
plenty of XX males who are SRY negative and XY females who are SRY positive. In other words, there are males who have
so-called sex chromosomes which are NO different than normal women’s sex chromosomes, and there are females who have so-called sex chromosomes which are NO different than normal men’s chromosomes. You would need to look at a gene on a NON-sex chromosome (an AUTOSOME) (example, upstream or downstream to SRY) to find a difference, for example, between a postoperative transsexual woman and an XY female (who can give birth).
BUT, guess what? There can be NO difference AT ALL in the DNA of such an XY female and a post-operative m to f transsexual in ANY of the so-called sex chromosomes OR autosomes, simply because it is not an arrangement in the coding sequence, but simply that an environmental agent (pollutant, for instance) turned
off a gene which would have caused an XY person to become a male, and thus caused the person to develop into an XY female. If a gene is turned off at week 4, you will get an XY female, yet if that same gene turns off in week 30, you will get an XY male (or perhaps a m to f transsexual) WITH NO changes in the genetics or the DNA if it is dues to an environmental agent.
to covered by him
your comments do not add anything to the validity of rational deliberation or bringing people closer to god in health. In that sense all that you have said so far is useless and people ignore justifiably. Yes god is unhappy with anything that damages or hinders the proper expression of creation but you are not to condemn them you know not their hearts. In any case if one is a firm believer in Jesus’ teaching they should know above all that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. All the old testament quotes you use to attack (wrong way to do it) people with such a rationality are out of context and psychological understanding. The issue for you is not the law of man but the law of god and you probably do not know the relationship between them in truth and what that entails for limited creation and human natural ignorance. People learn the difference between ethical and unethical action, and transexual surgery is among those to be learned no matter what the intentions behind it. I suggest that before one attacks someone with the bible they read it in the context that is humanity and not what their preacher and friends think it means. If you take man out of the bible it loses its significance and purpose so do not do it in your theology especially in a day where psychology can help man find and interpret whatever truth of scripture there is to find. Your argument from faith falls on deaf ears to those intelligent to know that the attack is unfounded, but it hurts those who love god and are confused and you should ask if that moral sin falls to you the attacker and false judger.
to melissa
You should be aware that although there are very few “male’s” with XX and “females” with XY those “males” and “females” have genetic syndromes in regard to the sex determining factors on their sex chromosomes. The X Y of females is really an XX manifestation in a problem of the sry of the Y. In males with XX, the problem is explaining the male development or the presence of the sry factor. A person’s physical manifestation cannot be the criteria for determining a persons sex because it is not self-caused it is developed and comes from something that is the sex (reproductive) determining factor. A body is not simply revealed male or female, rather a developed and maintained male, female. If not the only other is that the body is not properly developed in genetic problems. If one is to base sex solely on physical manifestation, are castrated individuals all sex or sexless? The question points to an absurdity because mammals even if not properly developed, develop as close to their genetic sex as possible. The sry genetic determining factor needs to be studied more but does not show that a person is not genetically a male or female. I ask that you consider a genetics class in your future studies of so called “transgender surgery”. One must realize that a male that has been castrated is not the same as a female that has had a hysterectomy. Though their genetic factors influence not only their sexuality and reproductive factors it shapes the body hormonally as a whole etc… A genetic male person taking hormones, has had breast implant, and hair and voice changes are only changing the appearance of their sex not their genetic identity. A female with a hysterectomy still has plenty of other objective womanly characteristics that make her a woman that a castrated genetic male does not have in any way even if he attempts to take hormones or have other surgeries and voice lessons. (I am not a geneticist) but the point is clear. Hope it makessense
I am so sorry that you are confused & choose to believe lies that the enemy of our creator tell you & make you feel. Yes I agree that “people are coming to believe that they can create, use, change and destroy life as they so choose."We all answer to the creator in the end."Political correctness” will and does divide us! Satan hates you & wants you confused against God & yourself. Ro.1:18-32(MB)But God’s angry displeasure erupts as acts of human mistrust &wrongdoing;& lying accumulate,as people try to put a shroud over truth. People refusing to worship him,trivialized themselves into silliness & confusion so that there was neither sense nor direction left in their lives.(A false god can be anything including self).
Refusing to know God,they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused & defiled one another, women w/ women,men with men—all lust, no love. (Today people call sex, “love” & they believe they can “love” anyone or any gender or thing they choose,after all they have these feelings, it’s called animal instinct/lust). (See Rom 1:27)2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness,& despise government/order. Presumptuous,selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. They despise interference from true authority, preferring to indulge in self-rule.
12 -14They are brute beasts.In the very act of bringing down others with their ignorant blasphemies. Their evil will boomerang on them.1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things in the world. Tts 1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him; Rom1:28 Even as they did not like to retain God in knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Dr. Fitzgibbons is right. Sex change maimings involve cutting off or maiming a body part to make some1 that they’re not. If a penis is surgically attached to a vagina, it involves operating on the vagina, injecting hormones into the body & other risks. Transexuals have to take a lifetime of hormones.
If a male to female transexual has male patterned baldness, it will take place, though it maybe slowed down by female hormones. Receding hairlines. There have been cases where transexuals have committed suicides, sometimes many years after the maiming because of regrets over what was done. Sex changes harm, even if apologists say otherwise. Dr. Nicolosi has said that it’s bad for a Dr. to whiten a Black person’s skin because he or she thinks that they were born white instead of black. The same thing with Gender Dysphoria. This will be repeat, but what’s so sad is that in many schools, teachers are pushing GID. Rather than curing GID, they’re encouraging 8 year old kids with GID to dress as the opposite sex or special bathrooms.
In California, there was a bill signed in 2007 which violates free speech of those opposed to homosexuality & GID in public schools. What it means is that public school teachers can only give a 1 sided view of homosexuality & GID-teachers & pupils who point out the harms of sex change maimings & who say that they see something wrong with homosexuality & GID face sanctions such as suspension. There was an incident in California where students were suspended for carrying a sign saying “Sodomy is a sin” in reaction to having homosexual activists push their views.
It’s sad that homosexual activists push the view that homosexuality & GID is OK. What’s worse is that opposing views are censored in Californi public schools. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed this public school law. Enough of homosexual & worse transexual apologists pushing their views in the schools. Incidentally, where’s the ACLU now?
Page 1 of 3 : 1 2 3 >