6,500 Reasons to Say ‘It’s a Girl’ or ‘It’s a Boy’

A pediatrician wants the entire population to suspend reality for the perceived struggles of a few.

By Michael Brown Published on December 5, 2017

You knew it had to happen sooner or later. A respected pediatrician has warned against announcing “It’s a girl!” or “It’s a boy!” at birth, or when the sex is visible on an ultra-sound. Why? Because “there are scenarios in which a sex assignment may later be questioned or reversed, leading to a significant amount of distress.” In other words, the child might later identify as transgender. By “assigning” it the wrong “gender” at birth, you do the child much harm.

As reported by Mary Hasson in The Federalist:

In the November 2017 issue of Pediatrics, Dr. Leena Nahata, a pediatric endocrinologist at the highly ranked Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio, sounds the alarm about the “gender reveal” phenomenon. She warns that a sonogram posted to Facebook, or a party to announce the unborn child’s sex, is a hazard to “pediatric health.” So is the traditional delivery room cry of “It’s a girl!” or “It’s a boy!”

Hasson continues:

Nahata isn’t concerned about blurry sonograms that fail to capture anatomical details. She’s also not really talking about infants born with “atypical” genitals, requiring further tests to determine if the baby is a boy or a girl. (She acknowledges that those cases are so “rare” that they occur just once among “4500 to 5500 infants” — i.e., in about 0.02 percent of newborns.) No, Nahata wants parents to embrace a trans-friendly world premised on the idea that “[r]egardless of gender assignment at birth, some kids may later identify as the opposite gender.”

Limitless Transanity

This is typical of what I call “transanity.” Transgender activists want to turn the whole world upside down because of the perceived struggles of less than 1 percent of the population. They want to deny the reality that biological sex corresponds to gender identity in roughly 99 percent of all human beings because of the emotional and mental distress experienced by roughly 1 percent.

That would be like removing colors from street signs and stop lights because some people are color blind. As explained by the National Eye Institute,

Most of us share a common color vision sensory experience. Some people, however, have a color vision deficiency, which means their perception of colors is different from what most of us see. The most severe forms of these deficiencies are referred to as color blindness. People with color blindness aren’t aware of differences among colors that are obvious to the rest of us. People who don’t have the more severe types of color blindness may not even be aware of their condition unless they’re tested in a clinic or laboratory.

This same site reports, “As many as 8 percent of men and 0.5 percent of women with Northern European ancestry have the common form of red-green color blindness.”

Despite these facts, we still make distinctions based on colors. Even though a small minority of the population cannot see those colors at all — or, at the least, cannot distinguish them clearly as colors. Why? Because the vast majority of people can see the distinctions clearly. They are quite useful in conveying a message.

We need to affirm and celebrate gender distinctions while we continue to search for ways to help those who struggle with their gender identity.

Transgender feelings still don’t have a definitive test. They cannot be definitively linked to biology or chromosomes. And yet a pediatrician wants us to suspend reality for 100 percent of the population just in case it will help the 1 percent of the population with these feelings. This is social madness. Especially when we realize how far the idea that “perception equals reality” can go. (I’ve addressed this many times before. But this one video illustrates the madness that ensues.)

And if we can’t identify whether the child is a boy or girl (which, I thought, tied in with sexual realities, not just with perceptions), what then do we name our children? Should we give them a male first name and female middle name? Then they can switch if desired later in life. Or should we give them gender-neutral names? And what about toys and clothes? Do we try a little of each to see which they prefer?

6,500 Genes With Sex Differences

As much as I intend these questions to expose Dr. Nahata’s ridiculous proposal, they are also real, practical questions these days. Some parents choose not to list their child as male or female at birth, giving the child a gender-neutral name. Parents magazine even ran an article titled, “Should You Raise a Gender-neutral Baby?” The madness is being normalized.

Ironically, earlier this year, “Geneticists from Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science discovered certain genes that are only expressed in women, while others are only expressed in men.”

As reported in May by CBN News,

Professor Shmuel Pietrokovski and Dr. Moran Gershoni studied 20,000 genes, sorting them by sex, and searching for differences in expression in each tissue.

They eventually found around “6,500 genes with activity that was biased toward one sex or the other in at least one tissue, adding to the already major biological differences between men and women.”

Some of the biggest differences were in genes responsible for body hair, fat storage, muscle building, and milk production for breastfeeding.

Go here for the PDF of the study.

So, there really are difference between males and females after all.

Reality and Compassion

We know, of course, that there are some people who suffer from biological or chromosomal abnormalities. This is designated as intersex. It is not the issue we’re focusing on here.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

Yet science has once again affirmed — now emphasized 6,500 times — that men are men and women are women. So the entire world needn’t conform to the painful struggles of a tiny percentage of the population who deserve our compassion. We need to affirm and celebrate our sex differences while we search for ways to help those who struggle with their gender identity.

But by all means, let us not suspend reality.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Linda

    Makes you wanna cry…

  • Howard Rosenbaum

    Right. It would be tragic if a generation from now the most popular name chosen by expectant parents is “Leslie” …!

  • “The entire world needn’t conform to the painful struggles of a tiny percentage of the population who deserve our compassion.”

    No one is being asked to “conform” to anything. If you wish to preach hellfire and damnation at transgender Americans, you have every right to do so. But the most compassionate thing you can do is allow them to live authentically and in accordance to the gender of the soul within.

    • Bryan

      In general for most of the population (the commenters on this site or others typically being an abnormal sample most likely), the live and let live mentality is the norm. The problem that presents itself is, as stated in the article, the people who want everybody to live like the minority just in case. The example from this article makes exactly that point. I have two children and they were both born as normal, healthy females. I didn’t say it’s a something but I’ll have to wait til they grow up to know if they are a boy or a girl. Both like pink and princesses. One like the outdoors and bugs more than the other. However both of them are feminine. If one of them comes to me one day and says “I think I’m really a boy”, we’ll have a long talk about why they feel that way and hopefully work through it.
      Another example is a trans person that I worked with on multiple projects. This person worked at a different company so I didn’t see or talked to them everyday, but we had to work closely together for a while. I have no problem respecting them as a human but I didn’t agree that they were in the wrong body either.
      In other words, it’s possible to be compassionate and truthful at the same time. It’s possible to respectfully disagree with a person’s choice and still interact with them authentically.

      • I suspect that your being “truthful” to a transgender co-worker would probably not be a pleasant experience for them. THEY’RE the ones having to live with gender dysphoria, not you. It’s their cross to bear, and if makeup and clothing and surgery help them feel better about it, it shouldn’t be any skin off your back.

        • Patmos

          “It’s their cross to bear”

          You are a truly delusional man. “Cross to bear” refers to persecution for following Christ, not perceived persecution for ignoring him.

        • Bryan

          Like I said, live and let live. It’s not an issue unless it’s forced to me. As long as the person in question isn’t berating me because I have a different opinion, I was badgering this person about the clothes they wore. We worked well together. They have since moved on and I’ve lost touch unfortunately. I’ve tried to not add to this persons burden, unless they owed me material that wasn’t onsite on time.

    • tz1

      Tell me how to determine if the soul within even has gender.
      The state of their existing body is a reality, and even given your value, other than the 0.05%, they are either male OR female. This is as much a fact as the Earth goes around the Sun.
      If I tried to deny evolution, climate change, or some other thing which are far less clear than the sex of a human being, you would insist whatever my soul within might think, I would have to conform to reality and that there would be evil in denying it.
      Those with body dysphoria want to have their limbs amputated because the body image of the soul within is that of an amputee, not someone with a healthy extremity.
      We can either live in a society where we expect people to behave in accordance with physical reality and established science, or one where everyone can make things up where they go along, so there can be no laws – either scientific or positive other than do what you imagine.
      Most cisgenders don’t want transgenders using the (biologically) wrong rest room or locker room. Most don’t want to be forced to worry about using he/she/xe or whatever the person happens to want to be addressed as these days.
      My soul within respects the reality of nature and natural law and it is a hateful act for you to force me to deny my soul.
      I can and will be polite and tolerant to someone on that basis, but I won’t tolerate them trying to force their unreal imaginations down my throat, or into the restroom.

    • Patmos

      “the most compassionate thing you can do is allow them to live authentically and in accordance to the gender of the soul within.”

      No, the most compassionate thing is to speak the truth in love, and help LGBT people face the trauma that made them that way so they don’t have to live in delusional fantasies where souls have genders and where lust is love.

  • tz1

    One point I sometimes make is that there is no technology or magic we have that can turn a man into a woman or a woman into a man. We can only build facades that aren’t completely functional. If they pay for it themselves, I’m libertarian enough to let them do it (similar to drugs or other bad habits that don’t create a nusiance or harm others).

    If internally, I imagine myself muscled, I just have to exercise. If I imagine myself thinner, I have to change my diet. I can become what I imagine. I cannot become a dog or a woman.

    A point CS Lewis made when noting magic and technology are more similar as are religion and philosophy. Magic and Technology seek to conform the natural world to the human thoughts and desires. Religion and Philosophy seek to conform human thoughts and desires to the natural world.

    It may be more difficult, but it is more charitable to do what is possible to conform those who think they are in the wrong gendered body into tolerating or even accepting the reality. Absent that, they need to realize they live in the real world where their body is one gender and others will accept them as that. They have to adapt or go create their own world. If I was in a Muslim country, I would not try to bring in dogs and pork meat and say “well, they just have to accept it”.

    The main problem, going back to my libertarianism, is that San Francisco does NOT have to have the same values, culture, acceptance, as Salt Lake City. The only reason for this article is that the left wants the entire country to have San Francisco culture and values and wants to fine you, ostracize you, or imprison you for dissenting. Why is it right to impose SF values on SLC, but not SLC values on SF?

Inspiration
Garbage In, Garbage Out
Wade Trimmer
More from The Stream
Connect with Us