It seems that the issue sort of peeking its head out from under the rug throughout this conversation is also one’s biblical understanding of the issue of homosexuality.

Actually, no, since sexual orientation is separate from gender. Some HBS women go on to be lesbians. That is, they are born male, have surgery, and then find a female partner. So yes, in that case, they would be homosexual. On the other hand, many HBS women are attracted to male partners, and after surgery find someone to marry. And there has even been at least one case where someone, after surgery, took vows of chastity and celibacy and entered a religious order.

The thing you have to remember about homosexuality is that a person who is homosexual wishes to be with a person of the same sex, who they see as a member of the same sex, and who sees them as a member of the same sex. Obviously, this is not the case when someone is HBS or transsexual.

If someone had XY DNA, female genitalia, and a female brain as described in the above dilemna, why would this person want gender reassignment surgery? Wouldn’t this person’s female brain prefer female genitalia?

I have never heard of such a person undgergoing sex reassignment surgery (gender reassignment surgery is misnomer, as no surgery is known that can change one’s gender) because, as you say, their female brain prefers having female genitalia.

I like the idea of DNA grounding one’s sexuality, so to speak. However, I am confused; if the brain is sexually differentiated as you say (and I have no reason to doubt this claim), how can someone “think” they should be a gender other than that which they are mentally inclined?

To be honest, this one is a mystery to me as well, but anyone who has spent any time dealing with people who are “transgender” (as opposed to those who are HBS or transsexual) will have observed people who are very obviously that way. In many cases, these people have a fetish and are motivated by sexual desire. In other cases, they seem to simply be looking for some way to rebel against society. And still others seem to simply think being “transgender” is a cool thing to be.

As an illustration, if I found out that I had female DNA (being an otherwise heterosexual male) I assume I would reject the idea of a gender reasignment surgery because having a male brain means I think of myself as a male. I could understand wanting surgery if I had male DNA and a male brain but female genitalia. This would be a position I think most evangelicals could support because testing DNA would confirm the persons mental inclinations twords a sex different then their genitalia. However, when the DNA and genitalia are male and the brain female, how do we confirm the person is “actually” female other than the person considering themselves female, which strikes many as uncomfortably subjective. The strength of your argument seems to be that their are times when gender reasigment surgery can be corrective.

Well, you have to remember that sexual differentiation starts with DNA but actually is controlled by hormones. That is why some people have genitalia that is contrary to their DNA, and other have a brain that is at odds with their genitalia. Now, you raise an issue that causes a lot of problems for doctors who treat people who have HBS. Unfortunately, at present, there is no physical testing available that can objectively confirm the diagnosis. The best that can be done is to have the person undergo examination by a therapist who is trained in these matters. And even then, some people slip through for whom the surgery is not a good idea. I do believe that standards need to be tightened, but the surgery is necessary in specific cases.

It is possible, with ongoing research, that a physical test may eventually be developed. But that is still a ways down the road.

On the other hand, I don’t trust feelings that “this feels wrong” either–I personally don’t much care for alcohol and wouldn’t mind if no one ever got drunk again, but to say that drinking is sinful (”alcohol is the devil in liquid form”, as my Baptist friend puts it) is going beyond what Scripture says. It’s all too easy to be the Pharisee who puts his own tradition above the actual Word, leaving the beaten man to hope that there’s a Samaritan coming.

Julie, if you’re still reading this, let me make sure I understand your position. You’re saying that:
a) your GID condition was congenital and therefore a result of sin only in the sense of Original Sin and fallen creation, not in sense that you caused it
b) medical treatment is a valid means of correcting the problem, just as it would be if you’d had cancer, birth defect, Siamese twin, etc
c) best medical treatment in this case is hormones and surgery? I haven’t looked into this but if the cause if physiological, then I assume psychological therapy is not going to help any more than it would for, say, grand mal?

Euphranor, I’ll try to answer your questions. Firstly, chromosomes are not infallibly reliable. That’s why the International Olympic Committee stopped gene testing - too many people were failing. There were too many 46xy (male) women who had actually given birth, and too many 46xx (female) men who had fathered children. And all too many people were either 47xxy, or mixes of 46xx, 46xy, 45x, and/or 47xxy.

People with either the 5ARD or 17BHDD mutations all look female at birth. But those with 46xy chromosomes get an apparent natural sex change between the ages of 15 and 25.

Right now, you’re right: the situation regarding diagnosis of transsexuality is “uncomfortably subjective”. But not as much as you might think. All major medical conditions have ’standards of care’ SOCs - set procedures for diagnosis and treatment that have been proven to be the best available, and transsexuality is no exception. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s (WPATH)’s SOC is now in version 6. It requires a 3-month observation by a trained mental health professional before administration of hormones, then a period of not less than one year of the patient living in the target gender before surgery can be authorised. Even then, it requires another clinician, this time a post-doctoral specialist in the area, to review the case and sign-off, putting his professional reputation on the line each time he does so.

The diagnostic success rate is well over 95%, anc compares very favourably with the diagnostic success rates of conditions such as myocardial infaction or diabetes.

Functional MRI scans - “brain scans” - show promise as useful diagnostic tools in the future.

Radiologists can now confirm what transsexuals report - that they feel “trapped in the wrong body” - on the basis of the activation of the brain when presented with erotic stimuli. There is obviously a biological correlation with the subjective feelings.

Original at ArzteZeitung, peer reviewed translation from the German and critique here

From the Deakin Law Review detailing “Significant findings of Justice Richard Chisholm in respect of the expert medical evidence in that case as to the causation of transsexualism and as strongly affirmed by the Full Court on appeal”

At paragraph [248]: ‘In my view the evidence is, in essence, that the experts believe that the brain development view is likely to be true, and they explain the basis for their beliefs. In the circumstances, I see no reason why I should not accept the proposition, on the balance of probabilities, for the purpose of this case.’

At paragraph [252]: ‘The traditional analysis that they are “psychologically” transsexual does not explain how this state came about. For example, there seems to be no suggestion in the evidence that their psychological state can be explained by reference to circumstances of their upbringing. In that sense, the brain sex theory does not seem to be competing with other explanations, but rather is providing a possible explanation of what is otherwise inexplicable’.

At paragraph [270]: ‘But I am satisfied that the evidence now is inconsistent with the distinction formerly drawn between biological factors, meaning genitals, chromosomes and gonads, and merely “psychological factors”, and on this basis distinguishing between cases of inter-sex (incongruities among biological factors) and transsexualism (incongruities between biology and psychology)’.

At paragraph [272]: ‘In my view the evidence demonstrates (at least on the balance of probabilities) that the characteristics of transsexuals are as much “biological” as those of people thought of as inter-sex’.

Then there’s my own case.

In 1985, as the result of a brief physical examination and some simple androgen studies at a Fertility Clinic, I was diagnosed as an “undervirilised male”. In 2005, as the result of very extensive examination. MRI and Ultrasound scans, blood tests and a karyotype, the tests triggered by some spectacular and rapid somatic changes, the formal diagnosis was changed to “severe androgenisation of a non-pregnant woman”.

Rather than being a mildly intersexed male, it was decided that I was better described as a very intersexed female. The terms ‘male’ and ‘female’ are problematic in such circumstances, where chromosomes, soma, and psychology don’t match. They are approximations. For what it’s worth, I’ve had the unshakeable conviction that I should have had a female body since early childhood. Objectively, I went from looking like a middle-aged, overweight ex-Rugby player who could not possibly be mistaken for a woman, to a rather frumpy and plain middle-aged woman who couldn’t possibly be mistaken for a man - and in just 3 months. The metabolic chaos nearly killed me of course, and I lost a third of my body mass. My endocrine system has now settled down to something appoaching a female norm.

neither I nor anyone else have been unable to detect any psychological differentiation between my own situation and that of “standard model” late-transitioning transexual women. This strongly suggests a biological causation for them too. The fact that my own transition was due to natural causes rather than external therapeutic measures appears irrelevant.

I find your comments interesting. I am new to this topic, so indulge an admittedly naive question:

If someone had XY DNA, female genitalia, and a female brain as described in the above dilemna, why would this person want gender reassignment surgery? Wouldn’t this person’s female brain prefer female genitalia?

I like the idea of DNA grounding one’s sexuality, so to speak. However, I am confused; if the brain is sexually differentiated as you say (and I have no reason to doubt this claim), how can someone “think” they should be a gender other than that which they are mentally inclined?

As an illustration, if I found out that I had female DNA (being an otherwise heterosexual male) I assume I would reject the idea of a gender reasignment surgery because having a male brain means I think of myself as a male. I could understand wanting surgery if I had male DNA and a male brain but female genitalia. This would be a position I think most evangelicals could support because testing DNA would confirm the persons mental inclinations twords a sex different then their genitalia. However, when the DNA and genitalia are male and the brain female, how do we confirm the person is “actually” female other than the person considering themselves female, which strikes many as uncomfortably subjective. The strength of your argument seems to be that their are times when gender reasigment surgery can be corrective.

Thanks in advance for your comments.

Thanks,
Euphranor

That is a wonderful testimony to Christian love. Yes, one who goes through this will often face horrible rejection. But your acceptance will go a long ways towards helping him get on with his life.

Jennifer

That’s been said to preface the fact that we have a transgendered,Transexual, person worshiping with us who has tried marriage and having kids and hormone therapy. We’ve been a very caring community for him/her and are in the process of learning to use him, his and he rather than female pronouns.

Is his issue physical, mental, emotional, or whatever? I don’t really know but I do know that he isn’t seeking to change sexes so that he can be part of a political or gay group. He is struggling with this and the rejection he’s had in the past and we’re walking through it with him.

Alan

In a sense, in between the Fall and consummated glory, all medical conditions are the result of sin. Not necessarily your sin (think of the man born blind in John 9:1-3), but sin’s affects on creation itself (Genesis 3, Romans 8:18-25), for we know that the day will come when indeed, all things are made new, and sickness will be no more, including yours (Revelation 21:3-5). Your sin was not your confusion but thwarting God’s created order.

Okay, this is as good a place to start as any. There is considerable evidence that the condition known as transsexualism, or to use a new term, Harry Benjamin Syndrome, is the result of hormone imbalances during fetal development. Now, this is not at all unlike the condition known as intersex or disorders of sexual development. In fact, I would argue that HBS is a form of intersex. You see, the brain is sexually differentiated, just like the body. In some cases, this can result in a child who has some abiguity in the genitals. Or, in extreme cases, primarily the one known as Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, you have a child who is XY who has female genitals, and a female brain. In another words, a naturally born equivalent of a post-op female to male transsexual.

Now, you speak of “thwarting” God’s created order. Okay, let’s assume for a minute, as the evidence clearly indicates, that a person who is HBS is born that way. The only know medical treatment is to use hormones and surgery to allow the person to live a normal life. You seem to think this is sin. Okay, I had a nephew who was born with a horrible birth defect. His parents had this corrected with numerous surgeries. By your logic, they thwarted God’s creative order.

Pardon my exegetical liberties, but your life now says “Peace, when there is no peace” (Ezekiel 13:10) and you have answered back to God, saying to the Potter, why did you make me as you did (Romans 9:20-26). I must humbly ask you if you believe that God made a mistake in your original gender assignment.

In your instance, “bearing your cross” to follow Jesus (Matthew 16:24) does not mean bearing ridicule and scorn for your choices, but denying your selfish desires for “self-fulfillment,” dying to yourself and joyfully submitting to God’s created order for your life.

I don’t write these things to judge you, but to humbly ask that you see how your current choices do not honor God as He has revealed Himself in Creation and Word.

You ask, does Julie believe that God made a mistake in her “gender assignment?” How often we hear this asked of transsexuals. Or, it is put in the form of a statement, “God doesn’t make mistakes!” Again, if that is so, then what of my nephew? Was he meant to be horribly disfigured? Was it wrong to correct the way he was born? Of course not! Does God make mistakes? No, of course not! But God does allow them to occur. And I thank God that He gave doctors the wisdom to help people such as Julie and myself.

Of course you feel more “accepted” by the transgender community. They’re telling you everything is fine while the church will not. But that neither makes the church unloving or irrelevant. Surely we tell our children when they are wrong because we love them. Is that judging? Is that mean-spirited? Does that lack the fruits of the Spirit? Being loving does not mean patting unrepentant sinners on the back telling them God loves them just the way they are.

Let me begin by saying that I do not identify as transgender. That is an artificial, social/political construct that has no objective meaning. It is used as an umbrella term for a wide range of behaviors.

No, the Church may not be unloving, but I believe many churches are quite ignorant on this subject. Unlike Abernathy, who has a history of expressing rather harsh disdain for Christians, I myself, am a devout Christian. I grew up in the South during a time when it was not uncommon for many Christians to express what can only be called racist sentiments. They would tell you, with absolute certainty, that their position was based on the Bible. They would tell you that the Bible clearly taught that certain people were inferior, and that races should not mix. Now, those same people will tell you today that they have repented of that sin, and that they were clearly wrong.

There is nothing in the Bible that directly, and objectively, teaches that those with HBS should not seek treatment. I myself prayed for “healing” for many years. Finally, in desperation, I cried out to God, saying “What? Do you want me to be a woman?” The answer came back clearly, “Yes, my beloved child, you finally understand.”

I would ask that you actually study this subject more. In the very rare cases that can be classified as HBS, or true transsexualism, the only treatment is hormones and surgery. There has never been a single, documented case of a person actually being cured by any other means. The brain is sexually differentiated just as the body is. Medical science can correct the body, but at present, cannot correct the brain. I searched in vain for such a cure. To say to a person with HBS, “Just be a man!” or “Just be a woman!” is no more reasonable than telling someone who was born a normal woman, or man, to be the opposite. And it is just a cruel.

Please, beware the leaven of the Pharisees, who placed blind orthodoxy above charity. You may not understand someone like Julie, or myself, but do not presume to tell us that we are wrong without being able to actually prove that we are from Scripture.

Yes, God created male and female. And then creation fell, and that is where we are. If I am wrong, then God will restore me to being a man when I am reach Heaven. If not, then I will be a woman for all of eternity. But for the moment, I seek to live as the woman I believe God wants me to be.