I'm sure most people here will know the case of David Reimer. An American boy who suffered a botched circumcision, he was brought up 'as a girl' but became extremely unhappy and reverted to being known as male at the age of fifteen.
It's worth noting that both David and his twin brother Brian were traumatised by the sexually abusive practices of their psychologist, John Money. David and Brian both committed suicide as adults. The damage here went well beyond one boy being raised in a feminine gender role.
However, TRAs are pushing this as proof that gender identity is innate - that David knew he was male even when everyone was telling him he was female.
It seems that David began to suspect he was male between the ages of nine and eleven. Some thoughts:
- If gender identity was innate, wouldn't David have had suspicions much earlier in life?
- At nine, he would have had more idea about male and female anatomy. He would probably have noticed that although he didn't have conventional male anatomy, he didn't have female genitalia either.
- He had an identical twin who was male. If looking at his twin was like looking in a mirror (save for the clothes and hair), he must have realised how 'boy-like' he appeared.
- By nine, certainly by 11, he may have been noticeably taller and stronger than the average girl. Certainly, he wasn't at all feminine in his mannerisms. His classmates bullied him, calling him 'cave woman'.
- Although his parents tried to raise him as female, they were religious traditionalists and would have had deeply ingrained ideas about gender. They had after all been forced into this rather than choosing it. Studies have shown that parents unconsciously raise children according to gender stereotypes even if they don't mean to - sometimes, even if they're fighting against it. So they put David in a dress and gave him a girl's name, but in their hearts they knew he was male. They may have treated him more like a boy in some respects, like encouraging him to take risks and play rough, while failing to compliment him on being pretty, passive, caring and vulnerable. That means David would have developed more 'boylike' behaviours.
What do you think? Do David's suspicions about being male prove innate gender identity? Or was it simply a reflection of the fact that he was male?