So for quite a long time I've surmised that the reason I am the way I am is because of things that happened before I was actually born. I didn't know what though. I had ambiguous parts when born and thankfully my parents did not have the doctor do any surgery. I did ask my dad once about it and he told me the doctor did recommend it and they refused because they couldn't actually find anything wrong with me health wise (no genetic conditions, etc.). Anyway, last year my aunt sent me a letter that my mom had written her while she was pregnant talking about having a boy. I'm not sure why my aunt sent it. It obviously really effected me seeing it thought because I've still been thinking about it. Then the other night my mom was talking about being pregnant with me for some random reason. Anyway, my mom was 31 when she got pregnant (and this was back in the 70s) and she was talking about how the doctor was giving her progesterone to "prevent miscarriage" because he felt she was "a little old" to be pregnant ::) This got me thinking even more and I ended up looking into what progesterone can do to a fetus. It appears through studies that the progesterone is metabolized by the fetus into androgens. Now when there is an excess of it (eg: the mother is taking extra than what her body is producing) that seems to be metabolized into testosterone by the fetus.
Granted, I'm not a doctor or a scientist and just doing research online but this certainly seems to explain some things for me and it could possibly for others. Because of being effected by an unnatural level of hormones before birth it changed the way I developed. Hormones have a very powerful effect on the development of the fetal brain and after week 12, added testosterone will change the structure to that of a male brain (while it also starts sending out the signals for the cells to start building male equipment rather than female).
Personally, this is a clear indication to me that 1) I don't have a mental "disorder" and 2) my head really is wired for male.
As far as I can tell, women are still being prescribed progesterone to prevent miscarriage. They could be being tested to see if they have low progesterone naturally, but I'm not sure. All I know is this explanation fits everything in my own case.
Now this is purely my opinion but I think it's a valid one - that any extra hormones the mother is given during pregnancy can effect the fetus. Doctors tell women to not even take OTC pain reviler or cold meds or anything while pregnant yet they prescribe other drugs which can certainly effect the fetus. That is one thing I don't get about the medical field and pregnancy. If the research is correct in this case, it's very likely that the doctor's "tinkering" with giving drugs like hormones to pregnant women is the direct cause for a percentage of intersex/transsexual/transgender occurrence. They could essentially be creating a 3rd gender.
Just like many people are utilizing hormones now to correct their bodies, some of us had them used on us before we were even born and had no choice in what they did to us. In my case, that very same doctor (my mom had him for 20 years) continued to screw my life up without my knowledge or consent before I even reached puberty. This probably explains why I feel so emotional, for lack of a better word when even discussing hormone therapy. Like I said, it's just personal for me and I still have a lot of resentment to the medical profession.
Anyway, it's a new decade and that's just something I needed to get out to move forward. If anyone else has any similar situations or theories, I'd love to hear them.
Quote from: Pat Kane on January 01, 2011, 02:28:09 PM
I've always thought that something happened in my mom's womb too. She had an enormous ovarian cyst removed before I was conceived. I know she has more androgens, because she has had problems with acne, gathers her weight primarily in her stomach, etc, which never happened before the cyst.
So I wonder if this contributed to my being trans. I'm the only bio-female so no one to compare to.
I always expected that something would show up to confirm that I was not entirely female. I had to get an ultrasound a year ago, and I was expecting that something would be missing. :P Nothing was missing, as far as I know my genitals are not ambiguous in any way. So I don't know. But I do think that it happened in the womb.
Oddly enough, something similar happened with my mom too. The reason why she didn't get pregnant until age 31 was that she couldn't. Then she got appendicitis and while the doctor was in there he saw her ovaries had a hard coating - he removed a wedge out of each one and a year later she was pregnant. She might have had PCOS or something as I've read that having a hard coating on the ovary and not having a period can be symptoms too. Odd thing is though, she says everything was totally "normal" after she had that surgery and she never stopped having periods until menopause. Which isn't typical I don't think for PCOS (usually women have continual problems from it). So in my case there could have been additional hormones my mom was producing as well.
I was always curious to see if something happened with my mom as well. All the members of my dad's and my mom's families have always had extremely high testosterone levels, and my mom was one of the people with the highest of them.
Never did that much research on it, but I wonder if that contributed to me being trans?
Edit: I'm not sure what drugs my mother might have taken- probably the same one that your mother took, insideontheoutside, since she was extremely scared of miscarrage and was older when she had me.
I've wondered if something happened in the womb that made me trans. I believe I was 3 months early, however my mom has said 4 in the past. Generally whenever I try to find out information about it, it's just faced with hostility. I've given up trying to get information from her. Years ago I found an old note book in the basement there was a weed leaf drawn on it, curiosity killed the cat here. It was my mom's diary from before I was conceived to pass my birth. I just flipped through it. From what little I read she wrote nothing about being pregnant or giving birth. Just various boyfriends, partying, and experiments with drugs. I always wondered how she managed to get new boyfriends while pregnant. I have a 1 year old sister now and turns out she barely shows. From what I read it's like she thought if she just ignored being pregnant that she magically wouldn't be. She definitely wasn't trying to keep her body a safe environment for unborn me.
Interesting thread. I don't know much about what my mom was on before I was born but I know I was two months early & on my original hospital birth certificate it has my gender listed as male then crossed out and has female written next to it but my official birth certificate just says female. I asked my mom why she says she doesn't know.
I also know I had a lot of breathing issues and couldn't go home until a few months after I was born so I sometimes sort of wonder if they didn't tell her about something...
I'm the fourth of four children my three brothers are 11,9, and eight years older than me. before my eldest brother was born mum miscarried a girl then again between the eldest and middle. So there was a sort of understanding that for some reason she wasn't able to carry girls- even to the point that when the midwife held me up and said 'its a girl' mum asked her if she was sure. Ive always believed that i was given something in the womb- naturally that is, not outside medication- to make sure that i was born
I have always wondered, as well. It's harder for me to learn much about my gestation, however, as I was adopted; although I've come to find (just in this last week, in fact), it wasn't through an agency, it's a little complicated but the result is after being born my birth mother decided she did not want to keep me. There was slight genital ambiguity but still within what they considered okay for 'female', although my overall size/weight at birth was very large and on the outlier end of the bell curve for female babies. My mom went out of her way to dress me in a lot of pink and frills because when she had me out in public everyone remarked on what a cute little boy I was (and this continued even when I had a dress on and a bow in my hair). Compared to my female friends, I went through puberty pretty late; I hit puberty when my male friends did.
I'm pretty sure I weighed 8lbs when born, which was thought to be high for a girl baby. Babies can be pretty androgynous, which is why parents tend to dress them in the clothes of the gender. I was always "mistaken" for a baby boy if my mom wasn't dressing me in pink and dresses and bows.
One of the things that kind of troubles me is how if there is some sort of question of gender in the baby or even something that was given to the mother while pregnant, it's damn hard to find "evidence" of it. It's like they purposely make it that way - keep the child in the absolute dark about anything that might have occurred and just bury it all. Here I am in my 30's and only very recently has some information came to light - and it didn't come from the doctor. I tried getting my medical records previously and no one could help me out. They simply "couldn't be found".
I've been thinking about this some more today and there is definitely a psychological factor going on here too. Let's say some information about either ambiguity at birth or any kind of environmental factors are covered up. You're assigned a gender at birth, but because of what you were exposed to, that had it's own effect on your brain and body while you were just developing into a human being, you feel something is "off". When you start to question the birth gender or just have a nagging feeling that "something isn't right" your whole life, you're often told, "it's all in your head" or that you have a disorder or there's something else mentally wrong with you. There is some statistic that (I think) 1% of babies born have ambiguous genitalia. But what is the percentage of babies born who might have had environmental factors (mother exposed to increased levels of hormones either being generated from her own body or given to her, other drugs, etc) that didn't get the ambiguous genitals?
Consider if there wasn't such a "cover up" in the medical industry that it might actually be more accepted that babies sometimes happen that are not 100% male or 100% female but a little of both either due to hormonal factors and/or physical factors? People who have been effected might not feel so "abnormal". Also, more clearly understanding the potential effects of certain drugs on pregnant women might make a difference as well.
Just thinking about all this stuff makes me feel like something more can be done, but the medical industry does not seem up for it. The majority seems to still be up for "correcting" any gender ambiguity with surgery. Until something can change that system and open people's eyes to the fact that variations (both natural and due to environment) can occur, it seems like there's little hope of actual advancement in the way gender is viewed in society. I think a new normal has to be established.
I do feel very fortunate that at least my parents did not go with some doctor recommendations, but for a large portion of my life I still felt like a "freak" and that there was something wrong with my head simple because people had said I was female, but that just didn't click in my mind. Had I made this connection 15 years ago, I might have not been so troubled for so many years still thinking that I was half crazy.
Quote from: perlita85 on January 01, 2011, 07:07:54 PM
We do not have the complete genetic picture of how the gender identity and/or sexual orientation centers of the brain develop. But research conducted over the last 10 years has shows some awesome facts. We know that the "ground state" is female –at least in mammals- and that to be male take active work b a number of genes all of which are govern by a master gene, called SRY, which is located in the Y chromosome.
As far as what we now so far for the biological basis of Gender Identity Incongruence (GII) the oversimplified picture is as follows:
If you are XX during the first 10 week of embryonic development the alpha fetal protein 1 (aF1) has to be present (in the extracellular fluid of the brain) fully functional and in high levels fr you to normally develop as a female. Failure to do so MAY result in GII and/or Homosexuality. Why ? Because aFT1 is needed to sequester (titer) fetal estrogen and/or testosterone. Excess steroids will masculinize the brain
For the XY individual several things need to happen for normal development of a male fetal brain. First, fetal estrogen and testosterone need to be present. Second, receptors for both E and T has to be present in the fetal neurons, third, a fully functional Aromatase protein has to be present inside the cytoplasm of the fetal neuronal cells. Aromatase converts T into E, and is the surge of E that masculinizes the brain, meaning, estrogen inside the neurons make certain neuronal centers and brain structures male..
Well, any exogenous steroids and other estrogen-like chemicals such as diethylstilbestrol and progesterone have the potential to wreck havoc with normal brain development and thus altering both gender identity and/or sexual orientation.
I am a DES child myself
I have read that information recently too. Very interesting stuff.
I've always wondered if because my mom was on progesterone shots (because she had a couple miscarriages/still births and had been trying to get pregnant for 4+ years) that it interfered with me developing male parts... I read a study about why people are trans and it said that everyone starts out female and what might have happened for ftms is the brain developed to be male, but something interfered and didn't allow the gonads to follow the brain and develop to be male. It seems possible.
Apparently I was 10 lbs something ounces when born. I do find it hilarious that I could be in a frilly pink dress with a pink bow in my hair and people still called me a boy, which really annoyed my mother. I suspect it's why she had me grow my hair very long when I was a kid; I was not allowed to get my hair cut short (I think I managed to get a 'short' hair cut once, when I was 6, after fighting and fighting for months... and even then it was only an inch shy of my shoulders).
I sometimes wonder about the mysterious things that happened to me in the womb, that I ended up not only transmale but gay.
I think it's interesting that both me and my sister have had gender issues...both of us have said we would've been happier born as male. While she's the more macho of the two of us, she still identifies as female though.
I've wondered about trying to get hold of my birth records. My birth mom's memory is not reliable at all. Ironically, the doctor that delivered me ended up being a cousin of the lady who several years later adopted me. I never got a chance to talk to him though before he died. I had always wanted to.
I was an early baby. I weighed approximately 1.3 pounds (600 gram) at birth, and I was apparantly tiiiiiiiny. My father's told me that if I had been born a boy (well, you know what I mean, I am a boy now too, but yeah), I would have died because apparantly there is some minor difference in the development of the immune system and that minor difference would have killed me.
I wasn't allowed to come home, and my parents said that I was hooked up to machines and it was a bit disturbing to see me.
The first thing I saw of the world outside the hospital was one of those jousting contests (like a renaissance fair or similar, but people dressed up as knights who joust).
Yep, that is my story. I don't know if something could have made me what I am today in the womb, but, well... I won't outrule the possibility.
Funny thing I remember from my time in maternity, big babies seemed to be so awkward. The mothers would say the same.
They would be really quiet for ages, thn all hell was let loose. Being big meant they were a lot of work of course.
But still fabulous and a pure pleasure like all babies.
Still remember one mother who was on her 4th, I think, saying that this one had better learn to walk pretty quick as she wasn't gonna carry that much for long.
I was tiny - 4 pounds 8 ounces, full-term - and a failure-to-thrive baby who put on nowhere near the recommended amount of weight in any year of my childhood. By 12 I was 5'5" and 93 pounds.
My mom, along with her mother, has many signs of high androgens both prenatal and throughout life. Extreme tomboyishness, male-pattern weight gain, acne and bad skin throughout her life, hair loss, lots of upper body strength, narrow hips, reproductive issues, relatively deep voice, male-typical finger ratios. I haven't spoken to her since I was 16 or I'd ask about progesterone shots; considering she'd had several miscarriages (I was the only child she ever managed to carry to term) I think it's reasonably likely she got them.
I didn't have ambiguous genitalia but I did/do have somewhat atypical genitalia (unusually long anogenital separation for a female, among other things) that have been remarked on by doctors.
Honestly, though, if something happened before I was born I'm kind of "glad" that it did. If it hadn't happened, then the person inhabiting this body would be someone other than me - "I" wouldn't exist. And I'd kind of rather exist in a mismatched body than not exist at all.
I was born the day before my due date around 9 lbs I believe. My mother said she was extremely surprised when they announced I was a girl because she was certain she was having a boy. As was everyone else using old wives tales and things like that. Also I was the first girl in something like 3 generations on my father's side. Which is interesting as it is the father who determines the gender I believe.
I was extremely judicious and needed to go back to the hospital for treatment under special lights. I know Mom use to say people constantly mistook me for a boy and she had to cover me in bows to get the message across.
Whether that means anything, who knows.
The medical community has this same belief for transmen. It's believed we're exposed to extra T while in the womb which makes the male brain develop. I guess whether the extra T came naturally or because of administered progesterone doesn't matter.
I wouldn't say my genitalia is ambiguous but it is different from others I've seen- including pre-T. I find it interesting that others guys do too.
Quote from: Andrew Scott on January 01, 2011, 04:12:01 PM
I also know I had a lot of breathing issues and couldn't go home until a few months after I was born so I sometimes sort of wonder if they didn't tell her about something...
The lungs develop last, which explains why preemies have a history of respiratory issues.
Quote from: kyril on January 02, 2011, 10:25:53 AM
Honestly, though, if something happened before I was born I'm kind of "glad" that it did. If it hadn't happened, then the person inhabiting this body would be someone other than me - "I" wouldn't exist. And I'd kind of rather exist in a mismatched body than not exist at all.
This is true. I've tried to look at other things in my life this way as well ... if I hadn't gone through them, I wouldn't be the person I am today.
Quote from: regan on January 02, 2011, 01:05:22 PM
The lungs develop last, which explains why preemies have a history of respiratory issues.
Yeah, that was the problem but I just meant I wonder if there was something else as well that they didn't tell her.
Quote from: kyril on January 02, 2011, 10:25:53 AM
I didn't have ambiguous genitalia but I did/do have somewhat atypical genitalia (unusually long anogenital separation for a female, among other things) that have been remarked on by doctors.
I didn't know that was unusual; I've got that too. Also, up until last year, I thought it was normal to have a clitoris that was about an inch long. Err...then I found out the average is the size of a pencil eraser or smaller.
See- i struggle with this one. My wife says my clitoris is bigger than normal but ive never noticed it. I would love it to be true then i stand a chance when it comes to meta but.......
Quote from: jmaxley on January 02, 2011, 05:00:51 PM
I didn't know that was unusual; I've got that too. Also, up until last year, I thought it was normal to have a clitoris that was about an inch long. Err...then I found out the average is the size of a pencil eraser or smaller.
LOL, that was news to me too. I thought it varied a lot person to person then I asked someone how many inches was considered abnormal and they said if you can measure it in inches then it's abnormal.
Quote from: jmaxley on January 02, 2011, 05:00:51 PM
I didn't know that was unusual; I've got that too. Also, up until last year, I thought it was normal to have a clitoris that was about an inch long. Err...then I found out the average is the size of a pencil eraser or smaller.
I guess it's possible that the average is that small, considering that there's so much variety. But an inch is also normal.
My mom was in high school when I was conceived accidentally. There is no way she was on any hormones or aid for the pregnancy. But in the time she was pregnant with me, she also suffered from moderate-to-severe mental illness (depression and anxiety). Considering both depression and anxiety involve hormonal imbalances (albeit, they do not involve sex hormones).
I'm not sure if this would contribute anything to my being trans.
Well, it's likely that my mom has PCOS, and she had a miscarriage before she got pregnant with me. First several months of pregnancy she was living in a developing country in Asia, so I have no idea what kind of drugs or supplements she might have gotten, or if there were environmental toxins of some sort. No idea about my fetal development/gender markers, she didn't want to be told my sex until I was born. Pretty much anything might have happened when I was developing.
Well, when I was first born, when my head came out, my dad said what a beautiful boy! Then the rest came out.. But, I guess I was born with some blood disease and I had to go get a shot every week. Whatever I had went away, but my mom said that people who have that disease as adults have to take steroids for it.. that just made me think.
Not all steroids lead to virilization.
I think that my birth and such was pretty normal. I have a standard female body in the upper normal hairiness range.
The only thing I've found atypical about myself is that instead of the standard single crown (hair whorl) I have three. Apparently this is sometimes linked to abnormal brain development in the womb.
yeah been wondering the same thing for months but frankly, we'll never know.And I don't want to keep tobbing on it, as it makes my mother feel guilty, not really what I want.
My mother has some sort of a breakdown because she was working to hard while being pregnant, at least thats what I understand from it. She spend weeks on the sofa because she had too or I would just 'fall out' as a miscarriage or something.
Meanwhile we also found out my body doesn't has enough T even for a female one, so my guess is ; somewhere down the line her T dramatically dropped making my brain male, without the appropriate body, as it just took on the female hormones where she does has allot of, to fill in the gaps. Sadly enough those where feminine features and genitalia, mixed with a very masculine body build ... yeah, not a pretty sight imo. can't wait to fix that.
As far as i know, my birth was pretty normal, and my mom had no issues during pregnancy with me. I was born about 2 weeks before my due date, weighed 7lbs 11 oz, and was allowed to go home within a day or so, whatever was normal in '84. My mom was 30 when I was born though, and had my brother at 34, so I wonder if she was put on progesterone at all.
I was always very thin, and didn't start puberty until i was 16, but always looked very feminine growing up.
As Yakshini mentioned, my mother's mental illness may have effected my hormones. She is bi-polar, but i dont know if she was on any medication for it before i was born, or if it would have effected me at all.
I don't feel like its worth looking into, or trying to find out more about though, because i doubt i'll find out any real explinations.
I don't buy the fetal hormone argument. For one, there is no solid, universally-agreed upon definition of what constitutes "masculine" or "feminine," let alone a "masculine brain" or "feminine brain". I suggest you read the book "Brain Storm" by Rebecca Jordan-Young. It is basically a meta-analysis of all of the studies that have been done on "sex differences" in the brain, and reveals how flawed and conflicting these studies have been.
Quote from: trnsboi on January 04, 2011, 04:44:07 AM
I don't buy the fetal hormone argument. For one, there is no solid, universally-agreed upon definition of what constitutes "masculine" or "feminine," let alone a "masculine brain" or "feminine brain". I suggest you read the book "Brain Storm" by Rebecca Jordan-Young. It is basically a meta-analysis of all of the studies that have been done on "sex differences" in the brain, and reveals how flawed and conflicting these studies have been.
I think it's more in the way that the brain associates itself with the body. Obviously, there is nothing definitively male or female about any given personality. But if the body is giving you dysphoria, there is obviously some disconnect.
Quote from: trnsboi link=topic=90077.b]msg651147#msg651147 date=1294137847]
I don't buy the fetal hormone argument. For one, there is no solid, universally-agreed upon definition of what constitutes "masculine" or "feminine," let alone a "masculine brain" or "feminine brain".[/b] I suggest you read the book "Brain Storm" by Rebecca Jordan-Young. It is basically a meta-analysis of all of the studies that have been done on "sex differences" in the brain, and reveals how flawed and conflicting these studies have been.
That's because there's a lot of continuous variation in a number of different brain structures. It's fairly clear that there are sex differences between men's and women's brains just as it's fairly clear there are sex differences between men's and women's faces, and when one can look at the whole picture (by owning the brain, or by seeing the face) its sex tends to be quite obvious. But the individual differences in each tend to be subtle enough and vary enough between the sexes that simply looking at a single difference is highly unlikely to allow the observer to identify the sex of the observed, especially if the difference is quantified as a single measurement like "nose size" or "volume of the BSTc region of the hypothalamus."
However, there is very strong evidence that fetal hormone exposure
does affect personality and behaviour. The strongest evidence comes from children with certain intersex conditions. Girls born with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) are XX girls with no common genetic abnormality who are almost always recognized and raised as girls from birth. Their hormonal abnormality is almost always caught early and treated, so they have normal hormone balances (for female children) after birth. The only difference between them and other girls is that they're known to have been exposed to high levels of androgens prenatally. Yet they show a significantly unusual level of tomboyishness and boy-typical behaviour and play preferences, and have an elevated chance of being lesbians.
Is prenatal hormone exposure the only thing that affects sex and gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation? Certainly not (or else identical twins would have a 100% concordance for sexual orientation and gender variance, instead of roughly 50% for orientation and some lower number for gender variance). But it's clearly a factor.
Quote from: kyril on January 04, 2011, 05:12:38 AM
TIt's fairly clear that there are sex differences between men's and women's brains just as it's fairly clear there are sex differences between men's and women's faces, and when one can look at the whole picture (by owning the brain, or by seeing the face) its sex tends to be quite obvious. But the individual differences in each tend to be subtle enough and vary enough between the sexes that simply looking at a single difference is highly unlikely to allow the observer to identify the sex of the observed, especially if the difference is quantified as a single measurement like "nose size" or "volume of the BSTc region of the hypothalamus."
However, there is very strong evidence that fetal hormone exposure does affect personality and behaviour. The strongest evidence comes from children with certain intersex conditions. Girls born with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) are XX girls with no common genetic abnormality who are almost always recognized and raised as girls from birth. Their hormonal abnormality is almost always caught early and treated, so they have normal hormone balances (for female children) after birth. The only difference between them and other girls is that they're known to have been exposed to high levels of androgens prenatally. Yet they show a significantly unusual level of tomboyishness and boy-typical behaviour and play preferences, and have an elevated chance of being lesbians.
Is prenatal hormone exposure the only thing that affects sex and gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation? Certainly not (or else identical twins would have a 100% concordance for sexual orientation and gender variance, instead of roughly 50% for orientation and some lower number for gender variance). But it's clearly a factor.
I disagree. First and foremost, how can there be "sex differences" between "men and women's brains" when we lack clear definitions of what constitutes a man and what constitutes a woman? Secondly, individuals with CAH are generally presented in the literature the exact way that you just presented them, ie: girls who were exposed to high levels of androgens in utero. But people with CAH are intersex, and it is not fair to label them as "girls" unless they identify as such (in fact, I'd argue that it is unfair to label anyone as anything unless they identify as such".
You really need to look at how these studies on hormones and behavior are being done as well as who is doing them, which is why I suggest reading "Brain Storm." It really puts a huge hole in the brain sexual differentiation argument.
Quote from: trnsboi on January 04, 2011, 05:17:16 PM
I disagree. First and foremost, how can there be "sex differences" between "men and women's brains" when we lack clear definitions of what constitutes a man and what constitutes a woman? Secondly, individuals with CAH are generally presented in the literature the exact way that you just presented them, ie: girls who were exposed to high levels of androgens in utero. But people with CAH are intersex, and it is not fair to label them as "girls" unless they identify as such (in fact, I'd argue that it is unfair to label anyone as anything unless they identify as such".
You really need to look at how these studies on hormones and behavior are being done as well as who is doing them, which is why I suggest reading "Brain Storm." It really puts a huge hole in the brain sexual differentiation argument.
How can there be "sex differences" between "men's and women's genitals" when we lack clear definitions of what constitutes a man and what constitutes a woman?
Fact is there are things in humans that are sexually dimorphic, and those include many if not most physical structures including parts of the brain. The fact that there is overlap, and some people can fall in either category depending on definition, and others who are clearly in one category nevertheless have some features typical of the other, doesn't mean there's no sexual dimorphism - it just means biology is messy.
And yes, kids (mostly girls) with CAH are intersex. My point is that the only thing that makes them intersex is prenatal testosterone exposure. They're genetically female children raised as girls. Their experience and biology differs from other girls (as a group) in only three ways: they have genitalia that's slightly to very atypical for girls, they received some medical interventions in early childhood, and they were exposed to more than the usual amount of testosterone in utero. Of those three differences, the only one that can reasonably account for their observed gender/sexuality differences from other girls is the prenatal testosterone exposure. This is different from other (genetic, or more extreme hormonal) intersex conditions that could theoretically affect children's gender/identity in other ways; an XXY child could have gender differences because of his/her genes, and a child with CAIS could theoretically identify as male because of genes or as female because of environment.
(Another interesting point is that I don't believe there are any reported cases of people with CAIS identifying as men or presenting to care providers as trans; if genes have a strong independent effect on gender identity we'd expect a lot of CAIS men, and if environment were the main factor we'd expect about the same incidence of male identification in XY CAIS people as we see in XX people. But we don't see that; we see people whose bodies are unresponsive to testosterone identifying - to the knowledge of the medical community - exclusively as women. This points fairly strongly to hormones being a necessary, if not sufficient, trigger for developing a male gender identity.)
Quote from: kyril on January 05, 2011, 01:41:26 AM
How can there be "sex differences" between "men's and women's genitals" when we lack clear definitions of what constitutes a man and what constitutes a woman?
Because there aren't. I know plenty of men with vaginas and plenty of women with penises. I also know plenty of people whose genitals do not fit either categorization. There is one thing and one thing only that all men have in common, and that is a male identity. Same with women, or genderqueer people, or any other group. Saying that there must be differences in the brain because there are facial differences is inane (and I would actually argue that there are not facial differences for the same reasons I stated above)--that would be like saying "there are differences between black people's faces and white people's faces, so there must be differences in their brains as well."
And yes, there have been individuals with CAIS who identify as male. Look here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/4w515837q0821487/ (http://www.springerlink.com/content/4w515837q0821487/) as well as here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20358272 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20358272)
My birth...well, I was born 3 or 3 1/2 months premature. I forget which. Don't know if that would attribute to any of my trans feelings since I wasn't in my mom long enough. :I
I think there must be differences between men's and women's brains. How your brain is wired influences your gender identity, does it not?
Yeah that's me too. My mom was given meds to prevent pre term labor (and was born pre term anyway) Of course there also was a lot of recreational drug use in that time too and how many of us know what our parents took and when for sure? (If they themselves even know) This would imply that our gender identity would have been different but got altered along the way tho.. And I'm not sure I believe that. I really do feel that our way of looking at male and female is much to binary.. I do find it striking how many of us there seem to be... So I just don't know..
I am actually a faternal twin. The doctors actually thought my sister was dead because she hardly moved. I on the other hand was very active in the womb. It shows in our personality even to this day.
How does this fit in with the topic? Idk...just thought I'd share.
Quote from: trnsboi on January 05, 2011, 03:18:16 PM
And yes, there have been individuals with CAIS who identify as male. Look here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/4w515837q0821487/ (http://www.springerlink.com/content/4w515837q0821487/) as well as here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20358272 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20358272)
There isn't enough data presented in the second link to offer a dissenting opinion. However, in the first case study, the parental influence can not be discounted. Just as some parents used negative reinforcement or simply reinforced the assigned gender role of their child to "cure" their gender variance, positive reinforcement by the parents has to have some impact on the continued gender variance of the child.
No doubt the child in the first case study expressed a male gender identity, the overt approval of the parents certainly encouraged the cross-gender behavior to continue. While not entirely motivated by a need for parental approval, that influence can't be completely ruled out.
Quote from: regan on January 06, 2011, 10:36:00 AM
There isn't enough data presented in the second link to offer a dissenting opinion. However, in the first case study, the parental influence can not be discounted. Just as some parents used negative reinforcement or simply reinforced the assigned gender role of their child to "cure" their gender variance, positive reinforcement by the parents has to have some impact on the continued gender variance of the child.
No doubt the child in the first case study expressed a male gender identity, the overt approval of the parents certainly encouraged the cross-gender behavior to continue. While not entirely motivated by a need for parental approval, that influence can't be completely ruled out.
I don't have CAIS but as far as I was aware people have studied how socialization, etc can influence gender. "Can" being the operative word there because it doesn't seem to be a hard rule. I've personally seen too many things that don't follow the supposed rules in life to even wholeheartedly believe every study that comes out on a topic. In my own case, while growing up my parents were what I call "equal gender opportunity" - they did not push me one way or the other and honestly I think that was very smart of them. I had girl toys and boy toys. I was encouraged to try all sorts of things but my parents let me make my own mind up. At 2 years old I was making decisions that, in a round about way, had to do with gender (rejecting playing with dolls and instead deciding I wanted to play out in the dirt with army men for instance). Also at 2 years old I had told my mom that I did not feel comfortable in a dress. My parents said I also kept bringing up the fact that I had "missing parts" and I would point to the crotch area of a doll. That's not exactly "normal" behavior for a 2 year old. I was also an only child so I didn't have any siblings to influence me. I lived in a somewhat rural neighborhood and there were not kids my age close by either. I did go to preschool and I remember some early incidents there where I was just being myself and the teacher thought it was "odd behavior" for a "little girl". That's pretty much how it's always been though. So in my particular case, something IS different and I really do believe that whatever happened in the womb IS the reason for it, not parental influence or socialization.
Herein lies the "nature vs. nuture" argument. I have always believed its not one or the other, but both. As in your nature has to be nutured or something like that. Children self-express (announce?) their gender variance when they begin to understand the difference between the genders, until then they are just being themselves as they know themselves to be.
The internet is full of stories of children who were both indulged in their cross gender behavior and consistently showed a preference for cross gender expression just as much as gender variant children who adapted their gender specific surroundings in order to express their gender variance (ie male bodied children who used sheets to form dresses or skirts for themselves)
Quote from: insideontheoutside on January 06, 2011, 11:23:11 AM
I don't have CAIS but as far as I was aware people have studied how socialization, etc can influence gender. "Can" being the operative word there because it doesn't seem to be a hard rule. I've personally seen too many things that don't follow the supposed rules in life to even wholeheartedly believe every study that comes out on a topic. In my own case, while growing up my parents were what I call "equal gender opportunity" - they did not push me one way or the other and honestly I think that was very smart of them. I had girl toys and boy toys. I was encouraged to try all sorts of things but my parents let me make my own mind up. At 2 years old I was making decisions that, in a round about way, had to do with gender (rejecting playing with dolls and instead deciding I wanted to play out in the dirt with army men for instance). Also at 2 years old I had told my mom that I did not feel comfortable in a dress. My parents said I also kept bringing up the fact that I had "missing parts" and I would point to the crotch area of a doll. That's not exactly "normal" behavior for a 2 year old. I was also an only child so I didn't have any siblings to influence me. I lived in a somewhat rural neighborhood and there were not kids my age close by either. I did go to preschool and I remember some early incidents there where I was just being myself and the teacher thought it was "odd behavior" for a "little girl". That's pretty much how it's always been though. So in my particular case, something IS different and I really do believe that whatever happened in the womb IS the reason for it, not parental influence or socialization.
Just because you think your parents raised you in a "gender-neutral" manner does not mean that they did, and it does not discount the role that society plays in reinforcing gender. Even the most liberal parents give their children gender-specific names and use gender-specific pronouns to refer not only to the child but to themselves and others. And even if parents were to do their best to raise a child "gender-neutral" you must remember that children do not live in bubbles, and neither does anyone else. Children--and the rest of us--are constantly being inundated with images of and messages about normative, binary gender.
Furthermore, you present your story as though there is something inherently "masculine" about not wanting to wear dresses or play with dolls, when in fact there is nothing inherently gendered about anything--especially inanimate objects. In Victorian times, the color pink was reserved for boys. And up until the 1960s or 1970s baby boys wore dresses (in fact, up until the early 20th century boys would wear dresses into early childhood until "breeching", at which time they would start wearing short pants). Mayan men wore more make-up and jewelry than Mayan women. Men in most cultures wore skirts up until very recently, and many still do. So if you had an aversion to wearing so-called "girls' clothes" it was because of the connotation (ie: you learned to associate it with femininity), not because such clothing is inherently feminine.
Quote from: trnsboi on January 06, 2011, 05:17:36 PM
Just because you think your parents raised you in a "gender-neutral" manner does not mean that they did, and it does not discount the role that society plays in reinforcing gender. Even the most liberal parents give their children gender-specific names and use gender-specific pronouns to refer not only to the child but to themselves and others. And even if parents were to do their best to raise a child "gender-neutral" you must remember that children do not live in bubbles, and neither does anyone else. Children--and the rest of us--are constantly being inundated with images of and messages about normative, binary gender.
Furthermore, you present your story as though there is something inherently "masculine" about not wanting to wear dresses or play with dolls, when in fact there is nothing inherently gendered about anything--especially inanimate objects. In Victorian times, the color pink was reserved for boys. And up until the 1960s or 1970s baby boys wore dresses (in fact, up until the early 20th century boys would wear dresses into early childhood until "breeching", at which time they would start wearing short pants). Mayan men wore more make-up and jewelry than Mayan women. Men in most cultures wore skirts up until very recently, and many still do. So if you had an aversion to wearing so-called "girls' clothes" it was because of the connotation (ie: you learned to associate it with femininity), not because such clothing is inherently feminine.
Of course very young children can know there is a difference in people simple by knowing they have a mom and also a dad. Parents can say things in passing or do things that reinforce roles (eg. "that's what daddys do ... that's what momies do ..." ... referring to others as a man or a woman, boy or a girl, etc). But I'm also not applying any of this to anyone else BUT me in that last post and theorizing about my own upbringing and consequent line of thinking. The only generalization I'm making is that even through studies, there can be some wild cards and as far as gender and the brain and body go I really don't feel science has all the answers. Too many variables throw off the experiment.
The only inherent gendered thing about dresses and dolls is the way American (and a few others) culture puts emphasis on them. I'm well aware of some other culture's (both past and present) customs as well (I was going for a cultural anthropology major for a short time in college). But I guess I should be giving myself more credit for figuring out all these gender connotations at the tender age of 2. Most kids do fit a gender binary from early on - exhibiting certain behaviors, preferences, etc. Was it then the fault of my parents for even allowing male-associated (by society) toys, ideas, clothing, etc. into my world and me latching on to that? Personally, I don't buy that.
You seem to be implying that I'm saying I'm "more trans" or "more male" or something. Which is not what the case. In fact I reject the label "trans". To me, that's something made up by psychologists to explain an otherwise natural (and by that I mean that it seems to occur in human nature) occurrence, that can then be a diagnoses and treated as a disorder/abnormality. That's my personal viewpoint. I only started this thread to think aloud after learning some information about my past and the "side effects" (or results) of a number of variables (both external and internal) that happen in the womb. Consequently, it might lead to explaining some of the differences I have from the so-called average person that sees themselves as the same gender as their biological body. Some others might feel that way to. Some others might not.
Yeah I think you're right it does take both nature and nurture..
It's also easy for people to have a point of view and be blinded to other possibilities.
I've seen my share of not so great things so when I had trouble in school they blamed my past.
As it turns out I'm dyslexic. When I learned about dyslexia I had a "no duh" feeling, it should have been obvious, but I actually kind of understand why they overlooked it. It's very human, and a little shortsighted...
Explaining our complexity with only one factor is a bit shortsighted too, doesn't mean there is no truth in it, just that that is just one little piece of the puzzle....
Why do you believe you have a 'default female gender identity'?
I was raised gender-neutral, both my parents have more opposite-sex traits than their own but they have no problems with their genitals. This is why I never thought anything was wrong with me until I started to use my genitals in interaction with other people.
But my pre-birth problems were also there, similar to most of the thread (obviously there's something there). Somewhere in the 6th week of pregnancy, my mother gained a lot of stress that stayed there until my birth - Chernobil explosion and all the media that were telling pregnant women how everything will be wrong with their children. That was especially stressful for her because she didn't want me that much (I understand her background story, so I don't take it personally) and it would be really bad for her if I would be handicapped. She said she was crying of fear through the whole pregnancy so I guess that would be a pretty strong factor for hormone mistakes during my development.
This thread is very interesting.
I'm the youngest out of 5 children, I have three sisters and one brother, though my brother is deceased (not due to any illness or pregnancy-related thing).
I was the biggest out of all of my sisters, I weighed 7 pounds and 4 ounces, whereas my sisters all weighed under 7 pounds (5 pounds 10 ounces, 6 pounds and 6 pounds and 2 ounces). My brother weighed in at 7 pounds and 10 ounces. I think I was born about a day before the due date, and from what I know my mum was under a fair amount of stress a lot of the time. She said I wasn't born with any sex ambiguity, and she wasn't taking any medication to prevent miscarriages or the like.
She did however have cervical cancer about a year before she was pregnant with me (she got part of her cervix removed before it spread), and she thought she wouldn't be able to have any more children after that. She has said that she always thought she was going to have a baby boy and she was rather surprised when they said it was a girl.
I'm wondering if cancer could have anything to do with it? As far as I know that was the only reproductive-related thing she had to get treated around the time I was conceived and born. Even if it doesn't, it's still quite interesting reading all of this thread.