doctor has been “sacked” as a medical assessor for a government department after refusing to renounce his Christian belief that gender is determined at birth, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/08/government-drops-doctor-says-gender-given-birth/
Welcome to government controlled medicine.
I make decisions every day based on Medicare/Medicaid rules instead of on medical science or patient/family needs.
Had you said ‘government controlled welfare’, you’d have been closer.
He was to be employed interviewing/judging people who were claiming disability benefits (he was not their medical adviser), these are often vulnerable, disabled people and he would have power over their futures, he was not prepared to behave in accordance with relevant legislation.
Christian conscience or the privilege of the bully?
Couldn’t open the link for some reason. But gender is not determined at birth. it’s determined at conception.
Genotype. What about phenotype?
Environmental factors do not determine gender. But it certainly is possible, even likely, that one’s desires regarding gender is impacted by environment.
Someone is going to be bullying. Someone is going to be imposing a worldview on people. I’d rather it be Christians than secular humanists, atheists or other groups.
Actually it can. If a gestating woman is exposed to too much testosterone during gestation, a genotypical female can be virulized and appear as a phenotypical male.
But this is rare. While such people should, like all people, be treated with the utmost of respect, we should not change societal norms of masculinity and femininity for them.
What do societal norms of masculinity and femininity have to do with genotype?
The existence of “intersex” individuals- a minuscule percentage, I might add- does not mean that sex is not determined at birth/in the womb. Nor does it mean that we should not list newborns as male or female to see how it all shakes out in 12-18yrs. If a child is born with some intersex condition then absolutely, do some additional digging before putting “male” or “female” on the birth certificate and/or surgically altering them. This however does not apply to over 99% of births, which should be recorded as male or female (not “assigned”) and treated as such for their own mental health and for the sanity of society.
The link is about “gender” (how one presents themselves to society) not “sex” (biological aspects, chromosome pairs, having a penis or vaginal, ovaries or testicles). As of yet I dont think the word “sex” has been repurposed.
This may vary from state to state, but my driver’s license and birth certificate identify my sex. Says nothing about gender.
You may have a point there, hadn’t thought of that.
Of course, if you DO have a point, the leftists will fight against THAT language as well. it will only be a point until sexual-fluid male (or female) insists that his (or her) drivers license doesn’t say male (or female).
That language can end up changing without a fight given how dictionary editing usually works. While people often look at dictionaries as authority on word use they are often written descriptively instead of prescriptively. Use a word the “wrong” way enough and a dictionary will document “this us a way in which that word has been used” (the word “literally” has experienced this).
If “gender” and “sex” get conflated in exchanges frequently enough it could be documented that the word “sex” is also used to talk about one’s presentation to society.
I dont expect a fight to change that language though. I expect it to be made something that simply is not talked about.
A bit off topic. I’m married now, but when I tried using online dating it took me a while to figure out how to filter my results the way I wanted. I was wondering why I saw men in my results. After a while I figured out that I had searched for “females” which included people identifying as females irrespective of whether they had a vagina or a penis. I had to do something additional to express “I am an unmarried man with a penis that is seeking an unmarried woman with a vagina with the intention of being married one day.” That sentence might look redundant, but one could search for any combination such as “married woman with a penis seeking an unmarried man with a vagina just for sex.” That was my introduction to figuring out how these identities and the language works.
Anyway, back to work. It looks that while I was out of town a new rule was made that we are to avoid gendered pronouns and language at work from here on.
I am a little confused because the article does refer to sex and that it is determined at birth…the whole conversation revolved around whether biological sex and gender can be seen as the same thing.
Regardless, I was directly responding to Ora Labora who said something along the lines of “assigning gender at birth is forcing a gender on the child”; I wish I could be more precise but the comment I quoted is now gone. While this could actually be true in the rare cases of a child suffering from an intersex condition where it is difficult or impossible to determine the sex of the child visually, it is not true for over 99% of children. And if we are talking of “assigning gender” at birth, what that really refers to is the sex written down on the birth certificate by the doctor/medical staff. Because that is all the doctor is dealing with at birth. The doctor is making no comment on the later gender role preferences of the child, he is simply putting the child’s sex on an official document. This is not an assignment, it is a recording of fact. To argue that this is forcing gender on people is patently absurd.
This touches on the whole transgender issue. It is proposed that sex and gender are two different things. Sex is merely biological while gender is mental. Sex is fixed (I guess?) while gender is fluid. The problem is that you really can’t escape your sex. So then transgender proponents claim that a doctor is forcing gender on people by writing their sex on a birth certificate. Suddenly sex and gender are the same thing…
Anyways, that was the point I was touching on, not specifically on the sacked doctor.
As for the doctor, it seems he was sacked based on the hypothetical assumption that his beliefs that sex and gender are the same and biologically determined would lead him to mistreat possible clients who wanted to be referred to by a different pronoun.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.