Jamie Lee Curtis is XY (a guy!!!)
Tim S DArne
A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing genes
that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
Anyone else heard anything??
*****************************************************************************
Tim d'Arne University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario, Canada
*****************************************************************************
Ülo Melton
tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
>Anyone else heard anything??
OK, everybody back away from this thread right now! I mean it - put
down your keyboards this instant. . . don't make me do something
we'll all regret.
Ülo "I've got the Lucas refrigerator joke, and I'm not afraid to post
it" Melton
Caprara AA
actually "she" is an XXY, also know as a 'super' female
Michele Tepper
In article <5gi209$k...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
I've heard that if you check the AFU FAQ, available on the Web at
http://www.urbanlegends.com/ , you'll find a great deal of information
about this story and why we don't much care to discuss it here.
Anyone else heard that?
Michele "listening for Mrs Porter" Tepper
--
Michele Tepper "It is hard to accomodate the States into normal
mte...@panix.com anthropology." -- Bruno Latour
Lee Boyle
On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:23:50 GMT, Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt)
wrote:
>On 17 Mar 1997 00:07:37 GMT, tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
>> A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
>>told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing genes
>>that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
>>woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
>
>Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
>likely to get him to lose his license. So even assuming it's true [xy],
>it's allmost certainly false [that a class was told].
Only if she was his patient, or the gynecologist heard about it from
her physician. Repeating ULs is not a breach of ethics. Besides, since
he was telling a medical class, the only breach would have been when the
student told the story to tda...@uoguelph.ca
XY's who lack receptors for testosterone develop as "more female"
than XXY's.
Lee "Isn't she Andy Griffith's daughter?" Boyle
Michele Tepper
Lee Boyle <boy...@nospam.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:23:50 GMT, Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt)
>wrote:
>>
>
> her physician. Repeating ULs is not a breach of ethics. Besides, since
> he was telling a medical class, the only breach would have been when the
> student told the story to tda...@uoguelph.ca
Sigh. OK, Sparky, what I want you to do here is go do just a little bit
of research on "doctor-patient confidentiality." Just a little; in fact,
hardly any at all. Just enough to let you know how completely wrong your
last assertion is.
Trust me, it won't hurt at all.
Michele "we're here to help" Tepper
--
Michele Tepper "Suggestions: (a) you each buy large, heavy dictionaries;
mte...@panix.com (b) you look it up; (c) you take turns whacking each
other over the head with said dictionaries for having
ever believed anything so silly." -- Ian Munro
JEL
I don't care if she is half aardvark.
When she did that little dance number in "True Lies", I came to the
conclusion that she had the best looking for a 40 + year old woman I
ever saw!
She can be 1/3 moose, 1/3 duck and 1/3 garter snake for all I care. She
certainly has one hell of a good looking, sexy 1/2 male, 1/2 female
body.
So who cares.
JoAnne Schmitz
Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt) wrote:
>On 17 Mar 1997 00:07:37 GMT, tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
>> A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
>>told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing genes
>>that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
>>woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
>Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
>likely to get him to lose his license. So even assuming it's true [xy],
>it's allmost certainly false [that a class was told].
In fact, we had a person tell us that her daughter's class was
told this by a professor. So it may be the same professor, who
may still be passing this around.
Hey, Tim. What med school is this? Do you have a name for the
teacher, or the student?
Posted, and emailed to DArne.
JoAnne "round again" Schmitz
-----
"Such elaboracy is unnecessary and obfuscative."
-Jeffrey Nelson, on alt.folklore.urban
Lee Boyle
On 17 Mar 1997 10:50:39 -0500, mte...@panix.com (Michele Tepper)
wrote:
>Lee Boyle <boy...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 04:23:50 GMT, Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt)
>>wrote:
>>>
>>>Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
>>
>> Only if she was his patient, or the gynecologist heard about it from
>> her physician. Repeating ULs is not a breach of ethics. Besides, since
>> he was telling a medical class, the only breach would have been when the
>> student told the story to tda...@uoguelph.ca
>
>Sigh. OK, Sparky, what I want you to do here is go do just a little bit
>of research on "doctor-patient confidentiality." Just a little; in fact,
>hardly any at all. Just enough to let you know how completely wrong your
>last assertion is.
>
>Trust me, it won't hurt at all.
>
>Michele "we're here to help" Tepper
My information is from the University of Arizona College of Medicine
Preparation for Clinical Medicine course. I don't know that it was
approved by a panel of lawyers or ethicists, but I think it passes as
just a little bit of research.
And yours?
Lee "you're on my list" Boyle
Rhiannon
Michele Tepper <mte...@panix.com> wrote in article
<5gikt0$l...@panix2.panix.com>...
> In article <5gi209$k...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
> Tim S DArne <tda...@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> >
> >Anyone else heard anything??
>
> I've heard that if you check the AFU FAQ, available on the Web at
> http://www.urbanlegends.com/ , you'll find a great deal of information
> about this story and why we don't much care to discuss it here.
>
> Anyone else heard that?
Ok, I understand that the ppl who have been here forever (maybe even
started the newsgroup) get tired of the same things after a while. But, is
the idea to enlighten ppl about the urban legends or just make sure that
anyone who asks about something we don't care to discuss is dismissed as
curtly as possible. I checked the faqs and it didn't seem to explain to me
why this subject is discussed here. As for whether it is true, I can't say
for sure having never seen her naked, but someone who has had the
opportunity to experience some intimate moments with her assures me she is
a female.
Ruth
ps. flame away since that seems to be the idea at times here.
Paul and Cindy Kruse
Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt) wrote:
>On 17 Mar 1997 00:07:37 GMT, tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
>> A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
>>told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing genes
>>that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
>>woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
>Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
>likely to get him to lose his license. So even assuming it's true [xy],
>it's allmost certainly false [that a class was told].
A biology teacher once told our class that in some women's sporting events, it
is required to make this test. Some women actually have a Y gene, but they are
not permitted to participate in these events. I have always assumed it to be a
UL, but have never known for sure. What can someone tell us about this? If
true, it would explain why such a thing might become public knowledge about an
athlete, without a doctor committing a breach of ethics.
plk...@iu.net (Paul Kruse)
Darren
genes in the Y or X decides your sex.
--
=================
X-No-Archive: Yes
Please put this at the beginning of all your replies to my posts.
Thank You =======================================================
Steve Patlan
>> http://www.urbanlegends.com/ , you'll find a great deal of information
>> about this story and why we don't much care to discuss it here.
>>
>> Anyone else heard that?
Rhiannon <snak...@centuryinter.net> blathered:
>Ok, I understand that the ppl who have been here forever (maybe even
>started the newsgroup) get tired of the same things after a while. But, is
>the idea to enlighten ppl about the urban legends or just make sure that
>anyone who asks about something we don't care to discuss is dismissed as
>curtly as possible.
Oh, we could be *much* more curt, believe me.
>I checked the faqs and it didn't seem to explain to me >why this subject
>is discussed here.
Hmmm, unfortunately, the Faq doesn't include a link to the relevant "more
info" page (which you could have found on your own with about 1 minute of
searching). It's at: http://www.urbanlegends.com/celebrities/jlc.html
They didn't archive any of the lengthy medical explanations, so why
dontcha toddle over to DejaNews and look a.f.u for articles from
"yronwode" with the Subject "JLC". You will find one nearly noice-free
article among the spluttering, backpedaling, and whining
self-justification. It contains all you ever wanted to know about various
genetic gender development disorders. If you see one with the title
"definitive genetics", ignore all the statements like "It's not a UL".
Only about five or six people are qualified to make such a statement, and
none of them post to this newsgroup. (Hint: You are not among them)
>As for whether it is true, I can't say
>for sure having never seen her naked, but someone who has had the
>opportunity to experience some intimate moments with her assures me she is
>a female.
Apparently, neither you nor your imaginary friend are aware that seeing
her naked or sharing "intimate moments" would not tell you a thing about
the possible existence of a Y chromosone.
>ps. flame away since that seems to be the idea at times here.
We only flame the clueless.
Steve "Hey! I guess that includes you!" Patlan
--
tex...@starbase.neosoft.com <*>
"Whoever said it doesn't matter whether you win or lose must have been
riding in the back of the loser's bus, covered in human filth" - Duckman
marybeth
I heard the same thing from a friend of mine who was a year ahead of me in
nursing school....one of his nursing profs told him the same story....i
never heard it because i transferred to a different major....and i'm in
oregon....who knows? i do know that her kid(s) is/are adopted and her
husband just inherited a title in England and it will never be passed to
any of their children because they can't have any "natural" kids and that's
a rule for passing titles around
JoAnne Schmitz <jsch...@qis.net> wrote in article
<5gkkre$3...@news2.cais.com>...
> Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt) wrote:
>
> >On 17 Mar 1997 00:07:37 GMT, tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
> >> A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
> >>told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing
genes
> >>that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
> >>woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
>
> >Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
> >likely to get him to lose his license. So even assuming it's true [xy],
> >it's allmost certainly false [that a class was told].
>
Michele Tepper
Lee Boyle <boy...@nospam.com> wrote:
>On 17 Mar 1997 10:50:39 -0500, mte...@panix.com (Michele Tepper)
>>>On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt) wrote:
>>>>Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
>>>
>>> student told the story to tda...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>Sigh. OK, Sparky, what I want you to do here is go do just a little bit
>>of research on "doctor-patient confidentiality." Just a little; in fact,
>>hardly any at all. Just enough to let you know how completely wrong your
>>last assertion is.
>
> Preparation for Clinical Medicine course. I don't know that it was
> approved by a panel of lawyers or ethicists, but I think it passes as
> just a little bit of research.
>
> And yours?
Mine comes from the Office of the General Counsel of the American Medical
Association, who quite kindly confirmed for me what I'd learned about
doctor-patient confidentiality from a former staffer at the University of
Michigan Medical Center's research ethics office.
Ms B.J. Anderson, one of the AMA's lawyers, explained that at teaching
hospitals, patients may be asked to sign releases allowing for their cases
to be discussed with medical students. No doubt this what Mr Boyle's
school's course tried to teach him, and he has mistaken the specific case
for a general one. Ms Anderson made it very clear that no doctor can
discuss a patient's case with a group of medical students without that
patient's written permission -- a permission that, from all the evidence
we have of Ms Curtis's attitude towards this rumor, she is not likely to
have given should that rumor be true.
Next?
Michele "don't try this at home" Tepper
--
Michele Tepper "Feel free to provide authoritative references;
mte...@panix.com in the meantime, you won't mind if we conclude
that you're simply making this up." -- Ian York
TJ
Michele Tepper wrote:
>
> Ms B.J. Anderson, one of the AMA's lawyers,
<snip>
>.... made it very clear that no doctor can
> discuss a patient's case with a group of medical students without that
> patient's written permission..
<snip>
Perhaps a can vs. may situation? (Please note: I said perhaps).
It *can* physically be done... and perhaps it was. I'm sure, given that
humans are humans, at some point in history a doctor has discussed a
patient's case without written permission.
'Shouldn't' or 'not legally' doesn't mean 'can't'.
-t 'what's the big deal about testicular feminization anyway??'j
Larry Preuss
In article <5gp8u8$p...@panix2.panix.com>, mte...@panix.com (Michele
Tepper) wrote:
> Mine comes from the Office of the General Counsel of the American Medical
> Association, who quite kindly confirmed for me what I'd learned about
> doctor-patient confidentiality from a former staffer at the University of
> Michigan Medical Center's research ethics office.
>
> Ms B.J. Anderson, one of the AMA's lawyers, explained that at teaching
> hospitals, patients may be asked to sign releases allowing for their cases
> to be discussed with medical students. No doubt this what Mr Boyle's
> school's course tried to teach him, and he has mistaken the specific case
> for a general one. Ms Anderson made it very clear that no doctor can
> discuss a patient's case with a group of medical students without that
> patient's written permission -- a permission that, from all the evidence
> we have of Ms Curtis's attitude towards this rumor, she is not likely to
> have given should that rumor be true.
>
> Next?
>
> Michele "don't try this at home" Tepper
This is precisely correct as I remember it, also from the UM. A Medical
School teacher may describe any case, as a teaching exercise, if it is
presented without specific personal identification. You often hear "D.G. is
a 43 year-old...." If the teacher tried to get cute with this convention
and said "J.L.C. is a female entertainment personality who...," it would
not satisfy that criterion, and would be unethical.
LP
--
Lee Boyle
On 19 Mar 1997 12:48:56 -0500, mte...@panix.com (Michele Tepper)
wrote:
>Ms B.J. Anderson, one of the AMA's lawyers, explained that at teaching
>hospitals, patients may be asked to sign releases allowing for their cases
>to be discussed with medical students. No doubt this what Mr Boyle's
>school's course tried to teach him, and he has mistaken the specific case
>for a general one. Ms Anderson made it very clear that no doctor can
>discuss a patient's case with a group of medical students without that
>patient's written permission
I think you're confusing a lawyer's advice with established standards
of medical ethics. You may also be confusing the AMA with a body that
has some sort of influence over physicians and hospitals.
I'll admit that I don't recall what, if anything, we may have been *told*
about confidentiality. I don't think we were ever lectured on the subject
specifically. What I do recall is what I lived for most of three years
beginning with the PCM class and continuing into clerkship rotations.
Doctors told us pretty much anything instructive or interesting about
any patient. Sometimes accompanied by a chart to read, sometimes with
an invitation to examine. One doctor had a bad habit of introducing me
as a consulting physician, so his patients wouldn't feel used.
I've considered that maybe every patient signed a release upon admission.
I know that they signed a form saying that they understood that they were
in a teaching hospital, and so some of their care might be provided by
students.
However, I spent a lot of time in other hospitals and in primary care
(HMO) clinics where I doubt that they could have found such a release form,
and where I would have been the one to ask them to sign it if it existed.
There may be a distinction in that if you can claim to be part of the
"caregiving team", you're expected to know everything, but that still
doesn't explain a lot of the cases.
Lee "you won't tell the AMA, will you?" Boyle
Tim S DArne
tdarne here, (evil thread starter as I have been now called)
what is going on?
If a doctor read in a journal about Curtis would it be a breach of ethics?
NO! Why do most of you assume that he/she received the info directly from
Jamie Lee Curtis. Seeing as Med school in question is 3 hours north of
Toronto Canada I highly doubt it was Jamie herself visiting the doctor.
Lighten up people.
I inquired into what I believed an "Urban Legend" because how could one
who flaunts one's breasts so much and often actually be XY. I was
astounded, wondered if it was true etc. Chill baby chill.
And to the person(s) correcting me with "She's actually XYY"...you're
WRONG.
Long live anal retentive people.
R. Wald
In article <5gqag0$3...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
>what is going on?
>
>If a doctor read in a journal about Curtis would it be a breach of ethics?
>
>NO! Why do most of you assume that he/she received the info directly from
>Jamie Lee Curtis. Seeing as Med school in question is 3 hours north of
>Toronto Canada I highly doubt it was Jamie herself visiting the doctor.
>Lighten up people.
If a doctor published an article in a journal about Curtis in which her
identity was revealed or could be figured out, _that_ would be a breach of
ethics. Reading the article would not be. You're not allowed to violate
confidentiality on the grounds that it's someone else's patient.
Rebecca "although I have seen Jeffrey Dahmer's MMPI profile" Wald
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Rebecca L. Wald | "And when I can't cook it cause they shut off my power
graduate student | I use it as a loofah when taking a shower"
U Iowa Psych Dept.| from "Ramen," by my old classmate Paul Anderson
jo...@netconnect.com.au
In article <5gqag0$3...@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca>,
tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
> NO! Why do most of you assume that he/she received the info directly from
> Jamie Lee Curtis. Seeing as Med school in question is 3 hours north of
> Toronto Canada I highly doubt it was Jamie herself visiting the doctor.
> Lighten up people.
If you look at a medical text, you will see that case studies
do not ever name the patient (oh, OK, they might name a long-dead
public figure). The fact that a doctor supposedly named Curtis
makes the story seem very unlikely
Jon
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Phil Edwards
melt...@u.washington.edu (Ülo Melton) wrote:
>Ülo "I've got the Lucas refrigerator joke, and I'm not afraid to post
>it" Melton
I suppose you think that's funny.
As I've always said, never trust an Etonian.
Phil "ULOS OUT" Edwards
--
Phil Edwards amroth(at)zetnet.co.uk
"But then, I'm a meany-head." - Lizz Braver
RFerrie
Tim S DArne wrote:
>
> tdarne here, (evil thread starter as I have been now called)
>
> I inquired into what I believed an "Urban Legend" because how could one
> who flaunts one's breasts so much and often actually be XY. I was
> astounded, wondered if it was true etc. Chill baby chill.
>
--
I'm going to jump in and offer a certain "other" newsgroups absolutely
definitive "proof" as to why Jamie Lee Curtis is 100% female (it's in
their FAQ, but this isn't a direct quote)
Point 1: Men who are sexually attracted to men are homosexuals
Point 2: I am a man
Point 3: I would gnaw my right arm off for the chance to have sex with
Jamie Lee Curtis, and so am not homosexual
Point 4: Therefore, Jamie Lee Curtis is a female.
The "how could anyone who shows off their breasts" question just reminded
me...
Renee
jjoh...@cybergate.com
> If a doctor read in a journal about Curtis would it be a breach of ethics?
>
> NO! Why do most of you assume that he/she received the info directly from
> Jamie Lee Curtis. Seeing as Med school in question is 3 hours north of
> Toronto Canada I highly doubt it was Jamie herself visiting the doctor.
> Lighten up people.
Oh, fer Ficka's sake. Dearheart, if a doctor of Ms. Curtis' were to
publish a paper on her, naming names, WITHOUT her permission, that would
be a breach of ethics, No? And, amazingly enough, no such paper can be
found in the literature.
> I inquired into what I believed an "Urban Legend" because how could one
> who flaunts one's breasts so much and often actually be XY. I was
> astounded, wondered if it was true etc. Chill baby chill.
This is not an urban legend, rather it is a celebrity rumor, a genre of
folklore that does get discussed here abouts. However, this particular
rumor has a certain...oh, how should I say it...execrable quality that
gets people all rilled up.
We're not saying that a professor didn't claim that Ms. Curtis was not
what she seemed. This ugly little rumor does seem to be entrenched in
the academic community. What we are saying is that these professors are
merely another link in a classic FOAF chain, and the only medical people
that could know this would be her personal physicians, and if they are
blabbing about it, they are unethical little putzes, who shouldn't be
believed anyway. Personally, I don't believe these people exist, because
I don't believe the rumor is true.
The only way to solve this little mystery would be to get Ms. Curtis to
admit to her condition. Denying it would do her no good, because "Well,
of course she'd deny it." No amount of academic discourse is going to
bunk/debunk this one, so lets drop it.
> And to the person(s) correcting me with "She's actually XYY"...you're
> WRONG.
Gads! [spit] Versions of this ULR have included about every possible
explaination for Ms. Curtis' "condition" They're all just as
unvorafiable.
You leave me with no choice.
Hitler. Hitler. Hitler, Hitler, HITLER!
Judy "just pushed the pan-it button" Johnson
TJ
jjoh...@cybergate.com wrote:
>
(I think I got the attributions straight here).
>
> The only way to solve this little mystery would be to get Ms. Curtis to
> admit to her condition. Denying it would do her no good, because "Well,
> of course she'd deny it."
she'll never go hungry. Why doesn't she say "I don't have testicular
feminization, but I don't see what the big deal is. It's not a choice,
it's not illegal, it's a human phenomenon that should have no moral
attachment to it as it required the volition of no one."
Alternatively: " I do have testicular feminization, but I don't see what
the big deal is....etc.etc.etc."
This could be done in a sincere manner that convincingly conveys denial
to all the but the types who believe the National Enquirer.
>
> Hitler. Hitler. Hitler, Hitler, HITLER!
F Andrew McMichael
Lee Boyle (boy...@nospam.com) wrote:
: I think you're confusing a lawyer's advice with established standards
: of medical ethics. You may also be confusing the AMA with a body that
: has some sort of influence over physicians and hospitals.
Do mean other than certification and decertification?
: I'll admit that I don't recall what, if anything, we may have been *told*
: about confidentiality. I don't think we were ever lectured on the subject
: specifically.
And you are claiming to be a medical student who apparantly got
to make rounds? Give me a break. What school did you attend that
never discussed ethics and patient confidentiality?
: Doctors told us pretty much anything instructive or interesting about
: any patient. Sometimes accompanied by a chart to read, sometimes with
: an invitation to examine. One doctor had a bad habit of introducing me
: as a consulting physician, so his patients wouldn't feel used.
This is different from being told in a classroom setting about
a patient, their ailments, and their name. The original poster
claimed to have gotten the name via a classroom setting. Nobody
here is suggesting that they watched while JLC was examined.
ANdrew "feeling queasy" McMichael
F Andrew McMichael
Tim S DArne (tda...@uoguelph.ca) wrote:
: If a doctor read in a journal about Curtis would it be a breach of ethics?
Her name wouldn't be printed in a journal, because that would be
a breach of ethics.
: NO! Why do most of you assume that he/she received the info directly from
: Jamie Lee Curtis. Seeing as Med school in question is 3 hours north of
: Toronto Canada I highly doubt it was Jamie herself visiting the doctor.
Here's a clue:
I talked with Dr. Richard Zaner's office of Medical ethics here
at Vanderbilt University's medical school. His office stated
flat out that using a patient's real name in discussing a
case among students would be a breach of ethics, and would
probably result in the termination of that Dr./Instructor from
the faculty. Further, said Instructor, if a Doctor, could
be subject to discipline from the State certification board.
This is regardless of whether or not the Instructor was the
patient's doctor or had heard the patient's name from another
doctor. Feel free to call his office at 615-322-2252 for
more information.
Andrew "back off" McMichael
Ülo Melton
Phil Edwards wrote:
>As I've always said, never trust an Etonian.
>Phil "ULOS OUT" Edwards
>--
>Phil Edwards amroth(at)zetnet.co.uk
>"But then, I'm a meany-head." - Lizz Braver
Jeez, he really _is_ a meanyhead. Kicked my s right out of there, he
did.
Ülo "the old man's side of the family is of English descent, but we
prefer not to talk about it" Melton
Larry Preuss
In article <5griui$7...@portal.gmu.edu>, amcm...@osf1.gmu.edu (F Andrew
McMichael) wrote:
> Lee Boyle (boy...@nospam.com) wrote:
>
> : I think you're confusing a lawyer's advice with established standards
> : of medical ethics. You may also be confusing the AMA with a body that
> : has some sort of influence over physicians and hospitals.
>
> Do mean other than certification and decertification?
The AMA has no regulatory power over the practices of doctors. It is
basically an interest group in which membership is voluntary and entirely
optional. It does not license them, certify them, or decertify them; these
are functions of individual State licensure departments.
LP
--
Madeleine Page
TJ (sti...@nwlink.com) wrote:
[JLC's double bind re denying she has TF snipped]
: I'm curious as to why she *doesn't* make a statement. She's a star now,
: she'll never go hungry. Why doesn't she say "I don't have testicular
: feminization, but I don't see what the big deal is. It's not a choice,
: it's not illegal, it's a human phenomenon that should have no moral
: attachment to it as it required the volition of no one."
Or she could simply say "I act - that's my job. The details of my private
life, my anatomy, my psyche and my soma are nobody else's fucking
business".
Until she says this, or something else, or nothing, the topic is, as Judy
Johnson so aptly put it...
: > Hitler. Hitler. Hitler, Hitler, HITLER!
: Pardon? I didn't quite hear you.
Madeleine "I heard that increasing deafness was a sure sign of
microphallus" Page
--
jjoh...@cybergate.com
In article <33323A...@nwlink.com>,
sti...@nwlink.com wrote:
>
> jjoh...@cybergate.com wrote:
> >
> (I think I got the attributions straight here).
> >
> > The only way to solve this little mystery would be to get Ms. Curtis to
> > admit to her condition. Denying it would do her no good, because "Well,
> > of course she'd deny it."
> she'll never go hungry.
Oh, fer Fricka's sake (Part II).
>Why doesn't she say "I don't have testicular
> feminization, but I don't see what the big deal is. It's not a choice,
> it's not illegal, it's a human phenomenon that should have no moral
> attachment to it as it required the volition of no one."
> Alternatively: " I do have testicular feminization, but I don't see what
> the big deal is....etc.etc.etc."
Nobody but Ms. Curtis herself can explain her silence. Perhaps
(speculation mode on) she thinks her medical history is her business.
Perhaps she doesn't want every comedian in the world using her situation
as a segue to a whole series of sniggering gender-bender jokes. Maybe
she's just sick of the whole stupid issue. Who knows?
Again, denying it will do her no good. Those people who want to believe
it will be convinced she's lying. Good, decent people, who should think
nothing less of her because of an unavoidable medical condition, should
also understand that it ain't none of their damn business, and respect
her privacy on this matter.
> This could be done in a sincere manner that convincingly conveys denial
> to all the but the types who believe the National Enquirer.
(switch to snide mode)
Yeah, right. New in town, are ya?
Judy "move along folks, nothin' here to see" Johnson
Patrick M. Berry
In article <33323A...@nwlink.com>, TJ <sti...@nwlink.com> writes:
> jjoh...@cybergate.com wrote:
> >
> (I think I got the attributions straight here).
> >
> > The only way to solve this little mystery would be to get Ms. Curtis to
> > admit to her condition. Denying it would do her no good, because "Well,
> > of course she'd deny it."
> I'm curious as to why she *doesn't* make a statement.
Perhaps she thinks it's none of anyone's business. Or she may find the
whole thing too ridiculous to dignify with a response.
Edward Rice
In article <lpreuss-ya0240800...@news.provide.net>,
lpr...@provide.net (Larry Preuss) wrote:
Actually, certification (and the extremely rare decertification) come from
the professional boards, which are specialty professional associations.
Lack of a certificate doesn't limit a practitioner very much, btw.
Kevin Keith
>Madeleine "I heard that increasing deafness was a sure sign of
>microphallus" Page
WHAT??
Kevin "well, somebody had to say it" T. Keith
--
Kevin T. Keith ktk...@panix.com
The Newest Yorker.
F Andrew McMichael
TJ (sti...@nwlink.com) wrote:
: I'm curious as to why she *doesn't* make a statement.
In the local paper here last week [Nashville Tennessean], after
the announcement of her impending marriage, she made a comment
to the effect that a lot of people think she's a lesbian,
and her marriage won't stop the more idiotic among them from
going right on with their beliefs.
Why attempt to address an even stupider rumor?
Margot Sheehan
Darren (mind...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Paul and Cindy Kruse wrote:
: >
: > Ke...@Quitt.net (Kevin D. Quitt) wrote:
: >
: > >On 17 Mar 1997 00:07:37 GMT, tda...@uoguelph.ca (Tim S DArne) wrote:
: > >> A friend in med school told me that a geyne.. (doctor for women)
: > >>told the class last year that Jamie Lee Curtis is XY but is missing genes
: > >>that have something to do with testosterone, therefore she looks like a
: > >>woman, has breasts etc. but has no working vagina.
: > >Assuming it's true, the gynecologist has committed a breach of ethics
: > >likely to get him to lose his license. So even assuming it's true [xy],
<snipper snip>
Ah, not true at all, about the breach of ethics. Doctors are very gossipy,
and JLC presumably wasn't this one's patient.
How nice to see this celebrity legend back on the boards. Kudos to you, XY
legend, kudos kudos kudos!
The JLC story probably *is* true. I got it from a friend of Christopher
Guest, who's been married to Jamie Lee for lo these many years. Until it
started popping up on newsgroups three years ago I didn't even realize it
was supposed to be scandalous. If Christopher and Jamie Lee were
treating it as a deep dark secret I certainly never got that impression
from those who know them. The condition is called AIS, is not
terribly uncommon, and it does *not* make JLC a 'guy', it just means her
uterus is rudimentary or missing. You will note that JLC has made no
particular secret of the fact that she cannot have kiddlyboos of her own,
and has adopted some.
--
Margot Sheehan
heat
I must be very behind the times - hasn't she been married to Chirstopher
Guest for years, or has she divorced him in favor of someone else?
Don Erickson
mar...@animal.blarg.net (Margot Sheehan) sez:
>
>The JLC story probably *is* true. I got it from a friend of Christopher
>Guest, who's been married to Jamie Lee for lo these many years. Until it
>started popping up on newsgroups three years ago I didn't even realize it
>was supposed to be scandalous. If Christopher and Jamie Lee were
>treating it as a deep dark secret I certainly never got that impression
>from those who know them. The condition is called AIS, is not
>terribly uncommon, and it does *not* make JLC a 'guy', it just means her
>uterus is rudimentary or missing. You will note that JLC has made no
>particular secret of the fact that she cannot have kiddlyboos of her own,
>and has adopted some.
This has bothered me somewhat, also. *If* JLC has some genetic
abnormality, so what? We all have to play the hand that we're dealt in
this life. If someone feels that AIS, or whatever, diminishes Ms. Curtis
or anybody else, this seems to me to be their own problem rather than
JLC's.
This 'celebrity rumour' is being vectored by university instructors and
Ms. Curtis is certainly within her rights to ignore the whole thing, but I
am rather perplexed by the severity this subject has been dealt with on
this forum in the past.
-Don 'voice of treason' Erickson
--
.sig got his new anti-spam hardware in the mail today. Now he's waiting
for the ammunition
Ülo Melton
der...@sky.net (Don Erickson) wrote:
>This 'celebrity rumour' is being vectored by university instructors and
>Ms. Curtis is certainly within her rights to ignore the whole thing, but I
>am rather perplexed by the severity this subject has been dealt with on
>this forum in the past.
The problem with this subject is that it runs in circles forever,
nothing is ever proven, nobody with a grain of sense cares about it,
and it attracts tittering celebrity gossip hounds who post
seventh-hand accounts and use words like "kiddlyboos." Other than
that, I've nothing against it.
Ülo "why do the Brits drink warm beer?" Melton
Steve Hutton
Paul and Cindy Kruse (plk...@iu.net) wrote:
: A biology teacher once told our class that in some
: women's sporting events, it
: is required to make this test. Some women actually have
: a Y gene, but they are
: not permitted to participate in these events. I have
: always assumed it to be a
: UL, but have never known for sure. What can someone tell
: us about this? If
: true, it would explain why such a thing might become public
: knowledge about an
: athlete, without a doctor committing a breach of ethics.
-
At the highest level of women's sports, a chromosome test is required.
Anyone with XY ("male") chromosomes is disqualified.
The reason for this is that male athletes are, on average, more muscular
than female athletes, and this difference is particularly clear when you
compare the best men with the best women. (This doesn't change the fact
that there are lots of women capable of beating the crap out of, say, me,
and if any of them are reading this, I have no idea who's been using my
computer account.) A so-so male athlete could, by having a sex change,
become a first-rate female athlete. The chromosome test is intended to
stop this.
This policy is controversial, because it hurts women who are genetically
unusual as well as male-to-female transsexuals. To tell a woman, who has
never thought of herself as anything but female and may well be capable
of conceiving and bearing children, "you're really sort of a guy, so your
sporting career is over," and tell her in front of millions of people,
is awfully cruel. Of course, it would be different for a movie star.
--
Steve "not that she is really XY" Hutton [speaking only for himself]
Cindy Kandolf
Margot Sheehan (mar...@animal.blarg.net) writes:
| You will note that JLC has made no
| particular secret of the fact that she cannot have kiddlyboos of her own,
| and has adopted some.
You will also note that there are many other reasons a woman might not
be able to have "kiddlyboos of her own", most of which are
considerably more common than AIS.
- Cindy Kandolf, certified language mechanic, mamma flodnak
flodmail: ci...@nvg.ntnu.no flodhome: Trondheim, Norway
flodweb: http://www.nethelp.no/cindy/
I will be out of town for an extended period starting later this week.
If you want to be sure that i read your reply, please e-mail me a
copy.
Cindy Kandolf
Steve Hutton (hut...@waterloo.hp.com) writes:
| At the highest level of women's sports, a chromosome test is required.
| Anyone with XY ("male") chromosomes is disqualified.
|
| The reason for this is that male athletes are, on average, more muscular
| than female athletes, and this difference is particularly clear when you
| compare the best men with the best women. (This doesn't change the fact
| that there are lots of women capable of beating the crap out of, say, me,
| and if any of them are reading this, I have no idea who's been using my
| computer account.) A so-so male athlete could, by having a sex change,
| become a first-rate female athlete. The chromosome test is intended to
| stop this.
|
| This policy is controversial, because it hurts women who are genetically
| unusual as well as male-to-female transsexuals. To tell a woman, who has
| never thought of herself as anything but female and may well be capable
| of conceiving and bearing children, "you're really sort of a guy, so your
| sporting career is over," and tell her in front of millions of people,
| is awfully cruel.
I have heard of several proposed alternatives to this kind of test,
but all of them have had problems. So the current system remains.
About the nicest thing you can say about it is that it beats the
previous "test", which involved having the athletes strip down and
stand in front of a panel of (mostly male) doctors, strangers to the
athletes, so that the doctors could look at each athlete's genitalia
and decide if it was female enough to pass. Eww.
I've heard (tm) that an important reason for the increasing popularity
of sex tests for female athletes was the appearance of some of the
Eastern European athletes, some of whom were exercised so hard from an
early age and pumped so full of steroids and other drugs [1] that they
didn't look very female to the casual observer.
| Of course, it would be different for a movie star.
Right. Besides, Ms. Curtis is rich and famous, and we all know rich
and famous people don't have feelings. That's why it's okay to spread
rumors about them that we wouldn't want to be spread about us.
- Cindy Kandolf, certified language mechanic, mamma flodnak
flodmail: ci...@nvg.ntnu.no flodhome: Trondheim, Norway
flodweb: http://www.nethelp.no/cindy/
[1] Anyone else remember the scene in "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes"
where the East German swimmer is chowing down on a breakfast of
"Steroids" breakfast cereal?
I will be out of town for an extended period starting later this week.
If you want to be sure that i see your reply, please e-mail me a copy.
Paul Tomblin
In a previous article, ci...@nvg.unit.no (Cindy Kandolf) said:
>I've heard (tm) that an important reason for the increasing popularity
>of sex tests for female athletes was the appearance of some of the
>Eastern European athletes, some of whom were exercised so hard from an
>early age and pumped so full of steroids and other drugs [1] that they
>didn't look very female to the casual observer.
"I'm a member of the East German women's cross country ski team, and I seem to
be developing hair in a very strange place. Could it be because of the
`vitamins' my coach keeps giving me?"
"Depends, where is this hair?"
"On my balls."
--
Paul Tomblin (ptom...@xcski.com), Rochester Flying Club
<a href="http://www.servtech.com/public/ptomblin/rfc/">RFC Web Page</a>
RFC is selling two of our PA28-181 Piper Archer IIs. See web page for details.
Phil Edwards
melt...@u.washington.edu (Ülo Melton) wrote:
>The problem with this subject is that it runs in circles forever,
>nothing is ever proven, nobody with a grain of sense cares about it,
>and it attracts tittering celebrity gossip hounds who post
>seventh-hand accounts and use words like "kiddlyboos." Other than
>that, I've nothing against it.
Unless of course the guy who said he heard it from Christopher Guest
could... But that way madness lies, or more probably FOAFness.
>Ülo "why do the Brits drink warm beer?" Melton
I am not going to rise to this. I am not going to rise to this. I am
*not* going to rise to this. I am NOT going to rise to this.
Hey, I've got one. Anyone wanna know the difference between an Old
Etonian and an old Estonian?
Phil "not that I've got a punchline, you understand, but it's a start"
Ülo Melton
Phil Edwards wrote:
>Hey, I've got one. Anyone wanna know the difference between an Old
>Etonian and an old Estonian?
The Etonians have Lucas refrigerators.
Ülo the Doesn't Relish Meeting Phil Edwards in a Dark Alley after This
One, and Who Further Realizes that these endonyms are indeed getting
ridiculous and will now return to internyms" Melton
Don Erickson
melt...@u.washington.edu (Ülo Melton) sez:
>
>Ülo the Doesn't Relish Meeting Phil Edwards in a Dark Alley after This
>One, and Who Further Realizes that these endonyms are indeed getting
>ridiculous and will now return to internyms" Melton
Wow, my brain hurts.
-Don 'or at least the fraction I'm using' Erickson
--
.sig wants the other half of Ray Depew's brain to check for damage. Take
it any way you want
Nancy J. Gill
ci...@nvg.unit.no (Cindy Kandolf) wrote: [about chromosome
testing for female athletes]
>I have heard of several proposed alternatives to this kind of test,
>but all of them have had problems. So the current system remains.
>About the nicest thing you can say about it is that it beats the
>previous "test", which involved having the athletes strip down and
>stand in front of a panel of (mostly male) doctors, strangers to the
>athletes, so that the doctors could look at each athlete's genitalia
>and decide if it was female enough to pass. Eww.
"Inspection of nude athletes was used only once as a test of
sex identity before it was replaced with a chromosome test.
The chromosome test required examining a plucked hair
follicle or tissue scraping from inside the cheek."
Michelle Kort, "Is She or Isn't She?: Women
Athletes and Their Gender Identity",
_Chrysalis 9_ (1979)
cited in:
_Babe_, the Life and Legend of
Babe Didrikson Zaharias,
Susan E. Cayleff, 1996
"Reliable chromosomal testing to determine gender came
thirty-four years after Didrikson's Olympic appearance. But
the rumblings were ever present in 1932 and Babe was the
primary target." _Babe_, the Life and Legend of
Babe Didrikson Zaharias,
Susan E. Cayleff, 1996
Babe entered the 1932 AAU championships, which doubled as
the Olympic tryouts that year, as a one-woman team. She was
pitted against two hundred women, on teams with as many as
twenty members. She entered eight of the ten events, and won
six of them, breaking four world records in three hours. She
earned thirty points. The second place team--Illinois
Athletic Club--had twenty-two points.
>I've heard (tm) that an important reason for the increasing popularity
>of sex tests for female athletes was the appearance of some of the
>Eastern European athletes, some of whom were exercised so hard from an
>early age and pumped so full of steroids and other drugs [1] that they
>didn't look very female to the casual observer.
Stella Walsh of Poland won thirty-five national
championships in events such as the broad-jump, discus,
basketball throw, and sprints, between 1930 and 1951, and
won gold in 60-, 100-, and 200-meter dashes in the Women's
Olympics in Prague in 1930. Speculation about her
chromosomal makeup persisted throughout her career. There
were no tests, and rumors were founded upon visual
impressions. Some athletes who competed against Walsh
maintained she was a man. ibid
"During the autopsy following Walsh's murder in 1980 the
coroner discovered her hermaphroditism; she did have male
sexual organs." ibid, citing "The Status of the American
Woman in Sport, 1912-1932"
Virginia Lou Evans
(Ph.D. diss., University of Massachusetts, 1982)
Nancy J. Gill
njg...@ix.netcom.com
The moral right of the author has been asserted.
Lee Rudolph
njg...@ix.netcom.com (Nancy J. Gill) quotes:
>"During the autopsy following Walsh's murder in 1980 the
>coroner discovered her hermaphroditism; she did have male
>sexual organs." ibid, citing "The Status of the American
> Woman in Sport, 1912-1932"
> Virginia Lou Evans
> (Ph.D. diss., University of Massachusetts, 1982)
Not to diss a Ph.D. (especially not from UMass, Doctress Neutopia's alma
mater!), but would this sort of clearly un-murder-connected finding of
the autopsy of a murder victim have been released as part of any public
document?
If we question--as we do, rightly--whether medical ethics permit so
many dozens of Ms. Curtis's personal physicians to report hither,
thither, and yawn on her genital conformation, I think we might also
question whether an official report is Dr. Evans's source, or whether
(just perhaps) she picked this juicy detail up from a friend of a
friend of a coroner. Does anyone know how to track Dr. Evans down?
Lee Rudolph
snopes
TJ <sti...@nwlink.com> wrote:
> I'm curious as to why she *doesn't* make a statement.
How do you know she's even heard the rumor? What's old news to you
may be unknown to others.
- snopes
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The high resolution of this article may reveal limitations inherent in |
| the original analog transcription. |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
David Lesher
lrud...@panix.com (Lee Rudolph) writes:
>njg...@ix.netcom.com (Nancy J. Gill) quotes:
>>"During the autopsy following Walsh's murder in 1980 the
>>coroner discovered her hermaphroditism; she did have male
>>sexual organs." ibid, citing "The Status of the American
>> Woman in Sport, 1912-1932"
>> Virginia Lou Evans
>> (Ph.D. diss., University of Massachusetts, 1982)
>Not to diss a Ph.D. (especially not from UMass, Doctress Neutopia's alma
>mater!), but would this sort of clearly un-murder-connected finding of
>the autopsy of a murder victim have been released as part of any public
>document?
Well I recall reading about it in the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
You might check the archives of it.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Leo G. Simonetta
Lee Rudolph wrote:
>
> njg...@ix.netcom.com (Nancy J. Gill) quotes:
>
> >"During the autopsy following Walsh's murder in 1980 the
> >coroner discovered her hermaphroditism; she did have male
> >sexual organs." ibid, citing "The Status of the American
> > Woman in Sport, 1912-1932"
> > Virginia Lou Evans
> > (Ph.D. diss., University of Massachusetts, 1982)
>
> Not to diss a Ph.D. (especially not from UMass, Doctress Neutopia's alma
> mater!), but would this sort of clearly un-murder-connected finding of
> the autopsy of a murder victim have been released as part of any public
> document?
>
> many dozens of Ms. Curtis's personal physicians to report hither,
> thither, and yawn on her genital conformation, I think we might also
> question whether an official report is Dr. Evans's source, or whether
> (just perhaps) she picked this juicy detail up from a friend of a
> friend of a coroner. Does anyone know how to track Dr. Evans down?
Her dissertation is available from UMI order no.: AAI8210320
A Virginia L Evans lives in Orlando, Florida,
E-Mail Address:vle7...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
As for Walsh here's what I found:
ARTICLE TITLE: A Question of Gender
AUTHOR(S):McMillen, Larry
NEWSPAPER:Times-Picayune | Sec. D, p. 1, col. 2 | Dec 5, 1991
NOTES:Photograph | News | Long (18+ col inches) | ISSN: 1055-3053
ABSTRACT: Former Olympic hurdler Roxanne Andersen is asking a committee
of the Athletics Congress to take away women's sprint titles won by
Polish runner Stella Walsh in the 1930s and 40s. Walsh's death in 1980
was followed by an autopsy which concluded she was a man.
ARTICLE TITLE: TAC Finds No Evidence That Female Winner Was a Man
AUTHOR(S):Rosen, Karen
NEWSPAPER:Atlanta Journal Constitution | Sec. D, p. 2, col. 2 | Dec 7,
1991
NOTES:News | Medium (6-18 col inches)
ABSTRACT: Stella Walsh won a posthumous victory Dec 6, 1991 when the
women's track and field committee of The Athletics Congress unanimously
passed a resolution saying accusations that Walsh was a man are
inaccurate. Walsh was the 1932 Olympic champion in the 100 meters.
TITLE: Sex test of champions. (gender testing of female Olympic
athletes)
AUTHOR(S): Grady, Denise.
PUBLICATION: Discover | v. 13 (June '92) p. 78-82
NOTES: feature article | il. | ISSN: 0274-7529
ABSTRACT: Part of a special issue on sexuality. Officials on the
International Olympic Committee have struggled with their definitions of
males and females. In 1968, chromosome testing of women athletes was
introduced to prevent men from trying to compete in women's events. The
test is based on the premise that women have 2 X chromosomes and men
have an X and a Y. However, many doctors and scientists oppose
this testing system. They argue that the tests unjustly
disqualify such women as Maria Jose Martinez Patino, who has an unusual
genetic condition that causes her to test as a man but who is clearly a
woman in body, mind, and athletic ability. The International Amateur
Athletic Federation has replaced its chromosome tests with physical
exams, but some geneticists and women's advocates argue that the gender
tests should be eliminated entirely. The article discusses the case of
Olympic athlete Stella Walsh,
who was later revealed to have both male and female chromosomes.
Doesn't look too well documented to me.
--
Leo G. Simonetta ARC...@LANGATE.GSU.EDU
margot
Leo G. Simonetta wrote:
>
> Lee Rudolph wrote:
> >
<snip>
Perhaps Babe Didrikson Zaharias's championships should be taken away
too, since she was felt to be unfeminine. And Martina's, while we're at
it. In fact, let's follow this to its logical conclusion and take away
*all* women's awards. Athletic women are ipso facto unfeminine and
thereby disqualified from winning anything.
Sheesh!!!
TJ
Soembody said:
> >
> > Not to diss a Ph.D. (especially not from UMass, Doctress Neutopia's alma
> > mater!), but would this sort of clearly un-murder-connected finding of
> > the autopsy of a murder victim have been released as part of any public
> > document?
long-dead grandparents. Autopsies (at least of a certain age) are public
record. I needed no permission, just 8 bucks, to get a photocopy of my
Grandmother's autopsy (she died at home not 'under a physicians care'
and thus an autopsy was done, despite my mother's grumblings). A
description of the reproductory organs was present.
For the curious I recommend this fascinating persuit...sort of a
geneology of demise.
Now, try to get hospital records on someone who died post-op in 1914.
Before they even check to see if they still exsist, the hospital wants a
letter from my grandfather's executor! They were not bemused by my
assertation that this man was probably if not definitely dead himself.
t 'how about the executor's executor's executor?' j
Enkidu
}
}Perhaps Babe Didrikson Zaharias's championships should be taken away
}too, since she was felt to be unfeminine. And Martina's, while we're at
}it. In fact, let's follow this to its logical conclusion and take away
}*all* women's awards. Athletic women are ipso facto unfeminine and
}thereby disqualified from winning anything.
}
}Sheesh!!!
Unfortunately, your attempts to dismiss this with a wave of the common
sense wand hold up about as well as "sheesh, what's all this stuff about a
cat that's alive and dead at once? Just forget the whole darn thing!!!!!"
The point is not to strip the title of athletes who act unladylike
(unladylikely?), but that XY women have some of the muscleature and
hormonal bulk that XY men do, and thus have the same advantage that keeps
male transvestites from competing in their category.
Of course, I suspect that this issue will begin to disappear into a larger
context as questions arise in years to come about how we can expect people
with _any_ genetic advantage to compete evenly. . . we have a very
free-will concept of sports that doesn't really get on well with the idea
that racing is even partially describable a series of trials to find out
which specimen has the most efficient hemoglobin, the strongest
disposition towards putting on muscle in the right places, etc.
Omar
afu is an immense testing arena being run by aliens to pick out humans
with the strongest genetic disposition towards humor, intelligence, and a
really strong taste for peanut butter.
--
"I could be living the best and happiest of all lives if only I were
not a fool."
- The sorrowful youth Werther, in _The Sorrows of Young Werther_ by
J. W. Von Goethe.
Respondants kindly asked to use the spacebar.
Barbara Mikkelson
At the time of Stella Walsh's death, the Coroner said (among other things)
that her birth certificate said she was a female.
Barbara "fee mail" Mikkelson
--
Barbara Mikkelson | Let's leave the French out of this.
bmik...@best.com | - Aaron A. Collins
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
View a random urban legend --> http://www.snopes.com/cgi/randomul.cgi
Steve Hutton
OK, I've found a cite (of sorts) for the Olympic athlete failing the
chromosome test and later getting pregnant story. This is from a story
in The Toronto Star from about 1984 or 1985.
Title: Sex mix-ups: How boys become girls
Subtitle: While doctors turned Siamese twin into female, nature often
does it by accident
Author: Marilyn Dunlop, Toronto Star
[Siamese twins, separated, and one surgically turned female stuff]
[genetic mix-up stuff]
Among those doctors who have spoken out against the Olympic testing is
Dr. James Griffin, associate professor of internal medicine at the
University of Texas, Dallas.
"Some people misidentified are revealed to the world -- and themselves --
as something other than what they thought they were," he says.
"A Polish woman runner at Munich was identified as a man. Her fiance
broke their engagement. She didn't know she was genetically male.
People who favour these tests believe that the Communist bloc countries
were entering a lot of men as women. I think anybody who cares enough
to compete as whatever sex should be allowed to do so. I'd rather let
a few abuse the games than cause the pain that is inflicted on those who
have been misidentified."
Chromosome tests are not always foolproof. Czechoslovakia's Jarmila
Kratochvilova has a muscular, masculine-looking build but, after
chromosome testing, was declared to be a woman. But, Poland's gold
medal sprinter, Ewa Klobkowska, failed the test in 1967. Later she
proved the test wrong by becoming a mother.
[other stuff snipped]
It's hardly authoritative, but at least it contains a specific name for
the woman (Ewa Klobkowska), a specific year for the test (1967), and a
specific name for an expert on the subject (James Griffin). Does anyone
want to follow any of these leads?
--
Steve Hutton [speaking only for himself]
Leo G. Simonetta
margot wrote:
>
> Leo G. Simonetta wrote:
> > ARTICLE TITLE: A Question of Gender
> > AUTHOR(S):McMillen, Larry
> > NEWSPAPER:Times-Picayune | Sec. D, p. 1, col. 2 | Dec 5, 1991
> > ARTICLE TITLE: TAC Finds No Evidence That Female Winner Was a Man
> > AUTHOR(S):Rosen, Karen
> > NEWSPAPER:Atlanta Journal Constitution | Sec. D, p. 2, col. 2 | Dec
> > TITLE: Sex test of champions. (gender testing of female Olympic
> > athletes)
> > AUTHOR(S): Grady, Denise.
> > PUBLICATION: Discover | v. 13 (June '92) p. 78-82
> Perhaps Babe Didrikson Zaharias's championships should be taken away
> too, since she was felt to be unfeminine. And Martina's, while we're at
> it. In fact, let's follow this to its logical conclusion and take away
> *all* women's awards. Athletic women are ipso facto unfeminine and
> thereby disqualified from winning anything.
Ummmm. Excuse me. Pardon. Thank kew.
I was answering someone's question about a particular female athlete.
No one was making a general comment about women athletes.
> Sheesh!!!
Furrfu!!!
Grant Hughes
I think it is useful to review some of the abnormalities in sex chromosome
numbers that humans exhibit (sex chromosome aneuploidy):
XX Normal female
XY Normal male
-X X monosomy (Turner Syndrome) - female
-heart diformities (coarctation)
-poorly developed secondary sex. characteristics
-reduced stature
-characteristic webbed neck
-lack of ovaries (gonadal dysgenesis)
XXY Klinefelter Syndrome - male
-increased stature
-breast development (gynecomastia)
-long arms, legs
-mental deficiency
XXXY and XXXXY karyotopes have been reported. Because of the Y
chromosome, these people are male, but the degree of mental deficiency and
physical abnormality increases with each additional X chromosome.
XXX Trisomy X - female
-occurs 1 in 1,000 females
-overt physical abnormailities rare
-some show menstrual irregularity, sterility
XYY XYY Syndrome - male
-taller than average
-1 in 1,000 men
-possible increased occurence of hyperactivity, ADD, and learning
disabilities
Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
GCH
Steven Tyler
Steve Writes:
I thought double Y's were also inclined to violent crime. Is this not
so?
Awaiting Correction,
Steve "not the guy from Aerosmith" Tyler
Bo Bradham
Grant Hughes <hug...@ohsu.edu> wrote:
>I think it is useful to review some of the abnormalities in sex chromosome
>numbers that humans exhibit (sex chromosome aneuploidy):
>
>
>Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
If you take the time to read this entire thread (which might
involve a trip to dejanews 'cause it was so close to being dead.
While you're there look at the last umpteen Jamie Lee Curits
threads too) you'll understand that the afu answer to
that question is "how in the hell should any of us know?"
Bo the followup redirector
--
"If it's their mistake, tough. If it's our mistake we negotiate."
- Overheard
wal...@dnvn.com
In article <5hu2ht$sef$1...@fremont.ohsu.edu>, hug...@ohsu.edu (Grant
Hughes) wrote:
> I think it is useful to review some of the abnormalities in sex chromosome
> numbers that humans exhibit (sex chromosome aneuploidy):
>
> Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
>
> GCH
This is irrelevant to this discussion which has been about whether
JLC has a rather common birth defect caused by a gene carried in the mother
which suppresses the effects of testosterone if inherited by the XY
fetus. The offspring are XY but have external female genitalia and are
always raised as females. Usually the internal testicles are removed
if the condition is suspected in infancy and the child receives estrogen
at the normal time for puberty.
This is not a particularly unusual condition and many 'women' have it.
It was last in the news during the period when gene tests were done
on women athletes. The Eastern block had a lot of XY women competing
in track and field events and when this was detected it was disallowed.
I don't know what current athletic policy is on this.
k
Rick Tyler
On 2 Apr 1997 20:08:43 GMT, wal...@dnvn.com wrote:
<snip>
>This is irrelevant to this discussion which has been about whether
>JLC has a rather common birth defect caused by a gene carried in the mother
>which suppresses the effects of testosterone if inherited by the XY
>fetus.
<snip again>
Nazis.
Hitler.
Liquid glass.
Rabbits and bunnies.
Endynymics (note the correct spelling).
Emoticons.
Smileys.
Waco.
Black Helicopters.
Furrfu.
Rick "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh" Tyler
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I came in late on this thread, which of course grants me license to make wild
unsubstantiated claims based on utter ignorance." -- Kevin Vigor
+ Remove the extra stuff to e-mail +
Jason R. Heimbaugh
Like the cat scotch-taped to an off-ramp, Steven Tyler
<sct...@worldnet.att.net> says to the world:
>I thought double Y's were also inclined to violent crime. Is this not
>so?
>
>Awaiting Correction,
Actually most crimes, especially violent ones, are committed by people with
XY chromosomes. We need mandatory imprisonment for these genetic freaks.
Robert Warinner
Grant Hughes (hug...@ohsu.edu) wrote:
: Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
I dunno. Why don't you ask her?
Andrew "stop this froup, I getting dizzy!" Warinner
wari...@xnet.com
wari...@ttd.teradyne.com
http://www.xnet.com/~warinner
Visit the Urban Legend archive: http://www.urbanlegends.com
Grant Hughes
In article <walker-0204...@129.59.196.38>, <wal...@dnvn.com> wrote:
>In article <5hu2ht$sef$1...@fremont.ohsu.edu>, hug...@ohsu.edu (Grant
>Hughes) wrote:
>
>
>
>JLC has a rather common birth defect caused by a gene carried in the mother
>which suppresses the effects of testosterone if inherited by the XY
>always raised as females. Usually the internal testicles are removed
>if the condition is suspected in infancy and the child receives estrogen
>at the normal time for puberty.
>
>This is not a particularly unusual condition and many 'women' have it.
>It was last in the news during the period when gene tests were done
>on women athletes. The Eastern block had a lot of XY women competing
>in track and field events and when this was detected it was disallowed.
>
>I don't know what current athletic policy is on this.
>
Although I disagree with you about the irrelevence of discussing related
aneuploidies, you are accurate in describing Jamie Lee Curtis' condition.
As for being common, I was under the impression that is was uncommon.
Testicular feminization results in XY individuals who have defective
androgen receptors. Since the gene for this receptor is located on the X
chromosome, the mutation is inherited maternally.
Isn't Jamie Lee Curtis a spokesperson for this phenomenon?
GCH
Grant Hughes
In article <3342BC...@worldnet.att.net>,
Steven Tyler <sct...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Grant Hughes wrote:
>>
>>
>> XYY XYY Syndrome - male
>> -taller than average
>> -1 in 1,000 men
>> -possible increased occurence of hyperactivity, ADD, and learning
>> disabilities
>
>
>
>I thought double Y's were also inclined to violent crime. Is this not
>so?
>
>Awaiting Correction,
There was one early study (in Scotland?) that claimed 1 in 30 male
prisoners was XYY, whereas only 1 in 1000 has this karyotype in the
public at large. Several subsequent studies, however, failed to show any
increased propensity of XYY individuals towards violence.
GCH
Rose Marie Holt
> I think it is useful to review some of the abnormalities in sex chromosome
> numbers that humans exhibit (sex chromosome aneuploidy):
>
> XX Normal female
>
> XY Normal male
>
> -X X monosomy (Turner Syndrome) - female
> -heart diformities (coarctation)
> -poorly developed secondary sex. characteristics
> -reduced stature
> -characteristic webbed neck
> -lack of ovaries (gonadal dysgenesis)
>
> XXY Klinefelter Syndrome - male
> -increased stature
> -breast development (gynecomastia)
> -long arms, legs
> -mental deficiency
>
> XXXY and XXXXY karyotopes have been reported. Because of the Y
> chromosome, these people are male, but the degree of mental deficiency and
> physical abnormality increases with each additional X chromosome.
>
> XXX Trisomy X - female
> -occurs 1 in 1,000 females
> -overt physical abnormailities rare
> -some show menstrual irregularity, sterility
>
> XYY XYY Syndrome - male
> -taller than average
> -1 in 1,000 men
> -possible increased occurence of hyperactivity, ADD, and learning
> disabilities
>
>
> Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
The fetus will develop female without the effects of testosterone. If the
end-organs have an insensitivity to testosterone, an XY will develop as a
female child.
Leo G. Simonetta
Aleph Press wrote:
> My professor told me that Jamie Lee Curtis was an androgen-insensitive
> XY. This does *not* mean she's really a man. I also don't know if it's
> true or not. (The beginning of the thread isn't here, but I'd assume that
> this started by discussing the question of "is the rumor tht Jamie Lee
> Curtis is XY an urban legend?" I have no idea if it is or not, but some
> women *are* indeed XY.)
We have a fair amount of hearsay that JLC is in some way atypical
genetically or hormonally, of course A.F.U.'s hobby is debunking
mere hearsay.
Did your professor say where he heard or read that JLC is an
androgen insensitive XY? Of what is he a profesor? Or better
yet what is his name and where does he teach.
A quick perusal of DejaNews will show that this topic has surfaced on
this newsgroup at least three times in the last 12 months. I am begining
to believe that this is an UL perpetuated by professors.
Perhaps they will tell me after I am promoted and they show me the secret
handshake.
--
Leo (Assistant Professor) Simonetta
ARC...@LANGATE.GSU.EDU My opinions. Mine! All mine!
Aleph Press
Steven Tyler (sct...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Grant Hughes wrote:
: >
: > I think it is useful to review some of the abnormalities in sex chromosome
: > numbers that humans exhibit (sex chromosome aneuploidy):
: >
: > XX Normal female
: >
: > XY Normal male
Unless the male suffers from androgen insensitivity syndrome. In this
disorder, the body does not have receptors for androgens, which
masculinize a fetus. Thus, although the gene to become male is present,
it does not activate. The result is a sterile female.
: > Does Jamie Lee Curtis fit any of these?
My professor told me that Jamie Lee Curtis was an androgen-insensitive
XY. This does *not* mean she's really a man. I also don't know if it's
true or not. (The beginning of the thread isn't here, but I'd assume that
this started by discussing the question of "is the rumor tht Jamie Lee
Curtis is XY an urban legend?" I have no idea if it is or not, but some
women *are* indeed XY.)
: Steve Writes:
: I thought double Y's were also inclined to violent crime. Is this not
: so?
It is not so. It was widely believed for many years, but later disproven
by better statistics that didn't rely so heavily on prison populations.
--
"These are only my opinions. If they were the gospel truth, your bushes
would be burning." -- Nancy Lebowitz button
"Freedom of religion includes freedom from religion." -- My favorite
bumper sticker
-- Alara Rogers, Aleph Press
al...@netcom.com
All Aleph Press stories are available at ftp.netcom.com /pub/al/aleph.
Theresa
...
My genetics prof said she is XXX (3 x chromosomes).
Madeleine Page
Theresa succinctly scribbled:
: ...
: My genetics prof said she is XXX (3 x chromosomes).
Good.
I assume your genetics prof was referring to Jamie Lee Curtis, rather than
herself? In which case you are in a good position to win phame and
phortune (oops, sorry, another thread) on afu.
Please ask your professor how s/he knows this. Please ask her what the
evidence is for her assertion.
If you feel shy about doing this (though lord knows why you should, given
that your professor was willing to make definitive statements about JLC's
chromosomal makeup and you were willing to pass them on), please just post
the name of the professor in question and the school where s/he teaches,
and I'll be pleased to write to enquire about her sources.
Looking forward to hearing more.
Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
--
For the afu archive, go to www.urbanlegends.com
Mike Holmans
mp...@panix.com (Madeleine Page) treated us to:
>Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
Certainly is. How else do you order half a pint of Wadworth's 6X?
Mike "I'm surprised that I have to explain these things" Holmans
El Sig is not going to make any remarks about whether Queenslanders
can spell 'beer'
Ramone
On 6 Apr 1997 10:10:28 -0400, mp...@panix.com (Madeleine Page) wrote:
>
>Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
>
No, it's a fairly good movie.
Barbara Mikkelson
> Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
Can't even one of you aspiring cyberswains pen a proper mash note?
Barbara "oh, Oh, OH!" Mikkelson
--
Barbara Mikkelson | I did not come to Usenet looking for love or
bmik...@best.com | affirmation, having plenty of that in my private
| life. Neither did I come looking for aggravation,
| having plenty of that in my private life as well.
| - Rhenda Iris Strub
JoAnne Schmitz
al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
>My professor told me that Jamie Lee Curtis was an androgen-insensitive
>XY. This does *not* mean she's really a man. I also don't know if it's
>true or not. (The beginning of the thread isn't here, but I'd assume that
>this started by discussing the question of "is the rumor tht Jamie Lee
>Curtis is XY an urban legend?" I have no idea if it is or not, but some
>women *are* indeed XY.)
I hope you'll tell us the name of your professor and the
university or college in which the professor teaches so we can
ask where the story came from.
Posted and mailed
JoAnne the always inquisitive
-----
"Such elaboracy is unnecessary and obfuscative."
-Jeffrey Nelson, on alt.folklore.urban
Jen Mullen
Jason R. Heimbaugh (ja...@heimbaugh.com) wrote:
: Actually most crimes, especially violent ones, are committed by people with
: XY chromosomes. We need mandatory imprisonment for these genetic freaks.
This is why I am switching to AZ chromosomes. They are far superior. You
can read all about this fascinating advance in human evolution at
http://www.az.com/.
The only difficult part is finding small enough tweezers.
--
Jennifer S. Mullen red...@psu.edu http://spitfire.ecsel.psu.edu/~redjen/
JoAnne Schmitz
jsch...@qis.net (JoAnne Schmitz) wrote:
>al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
>>My professor told me that Jamie Lee Curtis was an androgen-insensitive
>>XY. This does *not* mean she's really a man. I also don't know if it's
>>true or not. (The beginning of the thread isn't here, but I'd assume that
>>this started by discussing the question of "is the rumor tht Jamie Lee
>>Curtis is XY an urban legend?" I have no idea if it is or not, but some
>>women *are* indeed XY.)
>I hope you'll tell us the name of your professor and the
>university or college in which the professor teaches so we can
>ask where the story came from.
Alara was kind enough to send me the name of the professor and
university (thank you Alara), so I have sent an email to request
further information. I will keep you all posted.
JoAnne the maybe getting warmer
Andrew Mobbs
<font size=1 color=yellow> <strike> <blink>
Mike Holmans <mhol...@dircon.co.uk> typed:
>mp...@panix.com (Madeleine Page) treated us to:
>>Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
>
>Certainly is. How else do you order half a pint of Wadworth's 6X?
You _never_ order half a pint of 6X. It's far too good to waste in
small glasses.
ObUL: Has anybody got any facts about the frequent claim "It's illegal
to sell snakebite" ? I've been both served snakebite, and had to go to
the hassle of having to ask for "a 1/2 of cider and 1/2 of lagar in a
pint glass", which is inevitably followed by a smug grin from the
barthing.
--
Andrew Mobbs - and...@chiark.greenend.org.uk || aj...@cam.ac.uk
- http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~andrewm/
</blink> </strike> </font>
Ulo Melton
Andrew Mobbs wrote:
>ObUL: Has anybody got any facts about the frequent claim "It's illegal
>to sell snakebite" ?
Absolutely untrue. Here are just a couple samples from the Sigma
Chemical Company catalogue:
Acanthopis antarcticus (Common Death Adder) 10 mg $68.15
Dispholidus typus (Boomslang) 1 mg $30.75
>I've been both served snakebite, and had to go to
>the hassle of having to ask for "a 1/2 of cider and 1/2 of lagar in a
>pint glass", which is inevitably followed by a smug grin from the
>barthing.
Oh. Sorry.
Ulo "I'll just slither off, now" Melton
Bob Hiebert
In article <Pine.OSF.3.93.97040...@mole.uvm.edu>, Jeffrey Nelson / STILL AGIN' <jlne...@mole.uvm.edu> wrote:
>On 6 Apr 1997, Madeleine Page wrote:
>*Theresa succinctly scribbled:
>*: My genetics prof said she is XXX (3 x chromosomes).
>
>*please just post
>*the name of the professor in question and the school where s/he teaches,
>
>It's a community college. Need I continue?
No you don't. Educational bigotry is inexcusable. Some of the most
brilliant people that I have ever worked with didn't have ANY degree. On
the other hand, I've worked with degreed individuals that had no concept of
reality, and were a detriment to any organization they were involved with.
Should you accidentally get a job after graduation, I expect you will
demonstrate this.
I have seen great work come from people of all kinds of educational
backgrounds. For you to insinuate anything else is....so you.
>Jeffrey "embarrassed to be from Theresa's geographic community" Nelson
Given the long list of possible embarrassments you have to choose from, I am
surprised that this deluded thought would be anywhere near the top.
Bob Hiebert
Damn! I thought Dave's echo posts had worked.
--
E-mail address has bogus info. Modify to reply.
For more information on Urban legends,
set your sites on http://www.urbanlegends.com
Peter Dalgaard BSA
mhol...@dircon.co.uk (Mike Holmans) writes:
> mp...@panix.com (Madeleine Page) treated us to:
> >Madeleine "isn't XXX a sort of beer?" Page
...>
> El Sig is not going to make any remarks about whether Queenslanders
> can spell 'beer'
Just as well as Maddy can count, but why should they? They usually
converse it orally. It's just that the bottle gets signed by the board
of directors.
--
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3
c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N
(*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dal...@biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907
Bob Hiebert
I wrote:
>>No you don't. Educational bigotry is inexcusable.
Andrew Mobbs wrote:
>Are you claiming that there is no ordering on the value of educational
>institutes? I agree that it isn't an absolute measure of competence,
>but it's a reasonable heuristic. Of course somebody who has real-world
>experience of a specific part of a field will be more competent in that
>specific aspect, but given two people faced with a new situation
>(within a given area of knowledge) my money's on the one with the
>better education.
There's the rub, alrighty. Define better education. Would you believe that
Montana State University is one of the best schools I've found for embedded
firmware engineers? Hardly ranks up there on the standard list of "in
schools." The reason is the curriculum is focused on it. I am much more
interested in a new graduate's resume than I am the school that they
happened to attend while they were filling out the resume. I have worked
with a Rhodes Scholar and an MIT grad that I wished I had the authority to
fire. They were worse than useless. I'm not saying anything about the
schools in this respect either. It *always* comes down to the individual,
and can only be slightly influenced by the school.
I find Universities to be an inefficient method of information transfer.
If I am really generous let's say it's 25% as efficient as "real world"
experiences. That means a new college hire will gain the same amount of
knowledge in the first year on the job as they got in four years of
schooling. Within a couple of years after being hired, their "formal"
education will be only a small part of what they use.
Therefore, when I hire people I look to find those that hunger for
knowledge, and didn't just specialize at schooling. That's true of college
grads as well as people with 20 years experience. I am just not all that
interested in what the name of the school was. The interview process tells
me a lot more.
The real issue here was Jeffry's comment. For 'Agin to start slamming
someone who happens to be going to a community college is unforgiveable.
There is no telling where that person will end up in life.
>Hmm, that probably comes across as totally stereotypical Oxbridge
>arrogance, but WTH I'll leave it and see what happens.
Different people, different opinions. My observations may be true in high
technology, but not true with other disciplines. Then again, I have this
argument with people in my own industry. I'll stand by my own hiring
record.
Bob Hiebert
Andrew Mobbs
Bob Hiebert <Bob.H...@worldnet.REMOVE.att.net> typed:
>
>In article <Pine.OSF.3.93.97040...@mole.uvm.edu>, Jeffrey Nelson / STILL AGIN' <jlne...@mole.uvm.edu> wrote:
>>On 6 Apr 1997, Madeleine Page wrote:
>>*Theresa succinctly scribbled:
>>*: My genetics prof said she is XXX (3 x chromosomes).
>>
>>*please just post
>>*the name of the professor in question and the school where s/he teaches,
>>
>>It's a community college. Need I continue?
>
>No you don't. Educational bigotry is inexcusable. Some of the most
>brilliant people that I have ever worked with didn't have ANY degree. On
>the other hand, I've worked with degreed individuals that had no concept of
>reality, and were a detriment to any organization they were involved with.
>Should you accidentally get a job after graduation, I expect you will
>demonstrate this.
Are you claiming that there is no ordering on the value of educational
institutes? I agree that it isn't an absolute measure of competence,
but it's a reasonable heuristic. Of course somebody who has real-world
experience of a specific part of a field will be more competent in that
specific aspect, but given two people faced with a new situation
(within a given area of knowledge) my money's on the one with the
better education. I suppose this is partially because there's already
been a filtering process by the university selection procedure, but
mainly because better universities do provide better teaching and
better facilities (almost by definition).
If you were interviewing two two new graduates for a job, would you
consider them without regard to their university?
Hmm, that probably comes across as totally stereotypical Oxbridge
arrogance, but WTH I'll leave it and see what happens.
It's just occured to me that the financial aspect is probably more
significant in the US than here (we still have government funded higher
education, although the grants to students are infinitesimal). What I
said still stands though.
Rick Tyler
On 11 Apr 1997 01:21:43 GMT, aj...@thor.cam.ac.uk (Andrew Mobbs)
wrote:
<snip Bob Hiebert's thoughtful post>
:
:Are you claiming that there is no ordering on the value of educational
:institutes? I agree that it isn't an absolute measure of competence,
:but it's a reasonable heuristic.
Fascinating. Person "A" went to Oxford, person "B" went to the
University of California, San Diego. Therefore, it is a "reasonable
heuristic" to assume the Oxford graduate is more "competent." If you
filled in virtually any other descriptive value for a human except the
one you chose, you would be pilloried on AFU. (BTW, that may still
happen, stay tuned.) Try "skin color," "religon," or "political
party" and see if your analysis feels right. This is just an (what is
the English word for "Ivy League"?) excuse for being too lazy to
evaluate people as individuals. As long as you have the correct
necktie on, you are "in." No need to look farther than the club.
Stereotypes help us make simple judgments without having to do a lot
of thinking about every little thing. The problem is that stereotypes
help us make simple judgments without having to do a lot of thinking
about every little thing. It is too easy to assume that Oxbridge
graduates are "more competent" than UCSD graduates, because it is just
so much harder to think of individuals rather than groups. I could go
on here, but I might say "H*tl*r" and then no one would pay attention
any more.
:Of course somebody who has real-world
:experience of a specific part of a field will be more competent in that
:specific aspect, but given two people faced with a new situation
:(within a given area of knowledge) my money's on the one with the
:better education.
Mine too, I suppose, all else being equal, but I would bet on
experience over education otherwise. I would not argue that
"education" is no measure of ability, but based on *mumble* years of
experience in the world I would say that the standard deviation
generally overwhelms the institutional bell curve.
This also begs the question of causality. You seem to imply that
"better" universities produce "competent" graduates because they are
"better" institutions. The converse may be true. Seeking to cash in
(financially, academically, or through prestige-enhancement) students
self-select for "competence" by attending the institutions that give
them what they want. In other words, the better schools may be better
by attracting a higher proportion of students that would end up
"competent" no matter where they went.
Your conclusions do not _require_ the colleges in question to be
"better," but you do make the case that "better" colleges produce
"better" graduates. A nice tautological case, and hard to refute, eh?
:I suppose this is partially because there's already
:been a filtering process by the university selection procedure, but
:mainly because better universities do provide better teaching and
:better facilities (almost by definition).
Not in the US. Many of the "best" colleges in the US focus on
academic research to the recognized detriment of the undergraduates.
Many of the "second tier" colleges, especially many of the
state-sponsored schools, focus on undergraduate education more than
research. The question of which does a better job is complicated
because the "better" institutions tend to attract "better" candidates.
This does not mean that I believe they become "better" citizens after
graduation, just that the incoming student population is "better."
:
:If you were interviewing two two new graduates for a job, would you
:consider them without regard to their university?
No, but you might be surprised at what recruiters believe. When I
worked at Andersen Consulting we preferred certain colleges based on
the success rate of their graduates at Andersen, compared to how much
we had to pay them. A lot of "second-tier" colleges were "first-tier"
recruiting stops because we found we could get the same talent for
less money. (Isn't microeconomics a wonderful thing?) Every school
has top-notch students, you just have to look for them.
If I wasn't hiring for an academic research position, or entry-level
right out of school position, I would weight a candidates college
experience as the square root of the number of years since they left
college. If I were interviewing two 40-year-old management candidates
their college experience would rank very low in priority.
:
:Hmm, that probably comes across as totally stereotypical Oxbridge
:arrogance, but WTH I'll leave it and see what happens.
Hmmmph.
:
:It's just occured to me that the financial aspect is probably more
:significant in the US than here (we still have government funded higher
:education, although the grants to students are infinitesimal). What I
:said still stands though.
I cannot speak for the UK, but your implication about US colleges is
*mostly* wrong. Colleges in the US are all heavily subsidized in a
wide variety of ways. If you are smart and dedicated to getting an
education, poverty is not a barrier. The state schools, some of which
are among the best in the world, are usually reasonably priced and
offer scholarships and loans. The prestigous private colleges want
"good students" as much as students want to go there. A large
percentage of these students receive some kind of financial aid. You
cannot necessarily go to the school of your choice, but it is hard to
imagine a circumstance where someone capable of college work would not
graduate if they made it a serious goal.
The current grumbling about lack of student aid, etc., is exactly what
we said when I was an undergraduate. Real Facts about the cost of
college compared to ability to pay would be welcome.
I thought this post was a nice little bucket of intellectual snobbery,
institutional elitism, and stereotypical broad-brush painting. Kind
of refreshing, really, after the fl*wing gl*ss threads lately.
-- Rick "Yep, state school for me" Tyler
-----------------------------------------
There's no "goaway" in my reel a-dress.
Richard Brandt
Rick Tyler wrote:
> When I
> worked at Andersen Consulting we preferred certain colleges based on
> the success rate of their graduates at Andersen, compared to how much
> we had to pay them. A lot of "second-tier" colleges were "first-tier"
> recruiting stops because we found we could get the same talent for
> less money. (Isn't microeconomics a wonderful thing?) Every school
> has top-notch students, you just have to look for them.
Q: What do you call someone who graduated last in his class from
Johns Hopkins?
A: Doctor.
Richard "Master of Fine Arts and knows jack" Brandt
===================================================
http://rgfn.epcc.edu/users/af541/virtual.htm
"I don't remember Kimball Kinnison ever pausing to relax
over a cup of Yuban." -- Redd Boggs
Grant Hughes
In article <334EE8...@cris.com>, Richard Brandt <rsbr...@cris.com> wrote:
>Rick Tyler wrote:
>> When I
>> worked at Andersen Consulting we preferred certain colleges based on
>> the success rate of their graduates at Andersen, compared to how much
>> we had to pay them. A lot of "second-tier" colleges were "first-tier"
>> recruiting stops because we found we could get the same talent for
>> less money. (Isn't microeconomics a wonderful thing?) Every school
>> has top-notch students, you just have to look for them.
>
>Johns Hopkins?
>
>A: Doctor.
>
physician is treating patients.
Grant Hughes
Robert Allison
In article <5ikhq4$t...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
Bob.H...@worldnet.REMOVE.att.net (Bob Hiebert ) wrote:
[formal education vs. job experience discussion snipped]
>
>Therefore, when I hire people I look to find those that hunger for
>knowledge, and didn't just specialize at schooling. That's true of college
>grads as well as people with 20 years experience. I am just not all that
>interested in what the name of the school was. The interview process tells
>me a lot more.
>
[another good snip]
>
>Different people, different opinions. My observations may be true in high
>technology, but not true with other disciplines. Then again, I have this
>argument with people in my own industry. I'll stand by my own hiring
>record.
Me, too.
Umm, that is, I agree with you, Bob. I have 30+ years in the software
industry, most of it managing technical people. Education is all very well,
but it cannot substitute for experience. My hiring record can stand beside
yours in support of that contention.
Oddly enough, Life has recently handed me a nice glass of lemonade, and I've
been teaching computer science full-time at a local community college. In my
classes it very quickly becomes clear to me who will likely pass the course
and who not, based upon the interest of the student in the subject and the
effort they're willing to invest in it - their thirst for knowledge.
At the beginning of a semester, I will (only partly in jest) say in handing
out a programming assignment that they should have fun with this. They groan,
of course. Towards the end, only a few months later, many of them do indeed
enjoy programming for its own sake and will search out opportunities for more.
My experience has been that computer science grads, especially those from
universities known for their computer science program (eg, U of Waterloo),
take longer to learn from experience than those from lesser schools (or
indeed, no formal training at all). If they have a graduate degree, it seems
to take even longer.
In my hiring, I've also learned to pay attention to hobbies and personal
interests. Not only can you learn a lot about an individual from this, but
they also fall into 'patterns' that can assist a careful interviewer.
Robert "Why no, I didn't complete my degree. How could you tell?" Allison
--
Robert Allison
PC Wizard, Pine Ridge Systems, Ottawa and area, Ontario
http://www.magi.com/~rea/ 832-4037 r...@magi.com
Andrew Mobbs
Rick Tyler <rty...@concentric.net.goaway> typed:
>On 11 Apr 1997 01:21:43 GMT, aj...@thor.cam.ac.uk (Andrew Mobbs)
>wrote:
>
><snip Bob Hiebert's thoughtful post>
>:
>:Are you claiming that there is no ordering on the value of educational
>:institutes? I agree that it isn't an absolute measure of competence,
>:but it's a reasonable heuristic.
>
>Fascinating. Person "A" went to Oxford, person "B" went to the
>University of California, San Diego. Therefore, it is a "reasonable
>heuristic" to assume the Oxford graduate is more "competent." If you
>filled in virtually any other descriptive value for a human except the
>one you chose, you would be pilloried on AFU. (BTW, that may still
>happen, stay tuned.) Try "skin color," "religon," or "political
>party" and see if your analysis feels right. This is just an (what is
>the English word for "Ivy League"?) excuse for being too lazy to
>evaluate people as individuals. As long as you have the correct
>necktie on, you are "in." No need to look farther than the club.
That's a blatent straw-man argument. The very reason I'm arguing on
this distinction is that it is an applicable criterion to competence.
I'm not going to state that There Is No Cab^H^H^H Old-boy Network, but
it appears a lot less pronounced today than it once was, and certainly
is not at all evident in the technical professions.
>Stereotypes help us make simple judgments without having to do a lot
>of thinking about every little thing. The problem is that stereotypes
>help us make simple judgments without having to do a lot of thinking
>about every little thing. It is too easy to assume that Oxbridge
>graduates are "more competent" than UCSD graduates, because it is just
>so much harder to think of individuals rather than groups. I could go
>on here, but I might say "H*tl*r" and then no one would pay attention
>any more.
What you claim is stereotyping I'd argue is an observation on the
general case. I agree that when considering individuals one has to look
at each individual, considering all factors, including but not limited
to, their education.
[snip point we more or less agree on]
>This also begs the question of causality. You seem to imply that
>"better" universities produce "competent" graduates because they are
>"better" institutions. The converse may be true. Seeking to cash in
>(financially, academically, or through prestige-enhancement) students
>self-select for "competence" by attending the institutions that give
>them what they want. In other words, the better schools may be better
>by attracting a higher proportion of students that would end up
>"competent" no matter where they went.
You're probably right. There does seem to be a synergy between students
and institutions. However this is smoothed out to an extent by personal
preference on the part of prospective students, and some randomness in
the selection procedure.
>Your conclusions do not _require_ the colleges in question to be
>"better," but you do make the case that "better" colleges produce
>"better" graduates. A nice tautological case, and hard to refute, eh?
As are all chicken/egg situtations.
[snip]
>:
>:If you were interviewing two two new graduates for a job, would you
>:consider them without regard to their university?
>
>No, but you might be surprised at what recruiters believe. When I
>worked at Andersen Consulting we preferred certain colleges based on
>the success rate of their graduates at Andersen, compared to how much
>we had to pay them. A lot of "second-tier" colleges were "first-tier"
>recruiting stops because we found we could get the same talent for
>less money. (Isn't microeconomics a wonderful thing?) Every school
>has top-notch students, you just have to look for them.
Really? As somebody who's about to enter the job market I don't expect
to get paid any more than a graduate of another university for a given
job. I'd hope that I'd have more chance getting it, but I'm not relying
on that either.
>If I wasn't hiring for an academic research position, or entry-level
>right out of school position, I would weight a candidates college
>experience as the square root of the number of years since they left
>college. If I were interviewing two 40-year-old management candidates
>their college experience would rank very low in priority.
I'd agree in that case. I admit my POV is biased from a personal
perspective of being about to graduate from an "elite" institution, and
looking for a job.
[snip]
>:It's just occured to me that the financial aspect is probably more
>:significant in the US than here (we still have government funded higher
>:education, although the grants to students are infinitesimal). What I
>:said still stands though.
>
> You
>cannot necessarily go to the school of your choice, but it is hard to
>imagine a circumstance where someone capable of college work would not
>graduate if they made it a serious goal.
OK, my impressions of the situation in the US were inaccurate (I'm glad
to see).
>I thought this post was a nice little bucket of intellectual snobbery,
>institutional elitism, and stereotypical broad-brush painting. Kind
>of refreshing, really, after the fl*wing gl*ss threads lately.
Thanks for the review, now excuse me, my CRT is starting to drip.
Bob Hiebert
In article <Pine.OSF.3.93.970413...@mole.uvm.edu>, Jeffrey Nelson / STILL AGIN' <jlne...@mole.uvm.edu> wrote:
>Are you implying I was advocating educational bigotry?
Yes I am. You slammed someone for going to a community college.
>Ah, so informational accuracy is not based on level of education! Is that
>what you are subtly and oh-so-illegitimately trying to advocate, sir?
No, I didn't say that. I said information accuracy is not based on level of
schooling, and that schooling is a relatively inefficient form of education.
Follow along Jeffy, this isn't that hard.
>"I have one case that IMNSHO proves my point, so there, neener neener!"
I listed several cases on both sides of the argument.
>Now, my little survey is very crude and rude, but, does it get my point
>across???
No. I don't hire Universities. I hire individuals. What classes did they
take? What projects did they work on? What jobs did they have? Those are
a lot more important than what your "little survey" was about.
>Bob, I've got a show to put on here, and you're not helping.
No, Jeff. You don't. Your long-winded diatribes have worn thin. You think
you are clever and you are not.
In this case, I'll hand you a free clue. Several people with real jobs that
hire real people have argued against your case. You don't have a real job.
Maybe you shouldn't argue so much about this one.
Bob Hiebert
In article <Pine.OSF.3.93.970413...@mole.uvm.edu>, Jeffrey Nelson / STILL AGIN' <jlne...@mole.uvm.edu> wrote:
>Come to think of it, I'm already doing you
>the favor of completely your sloppy retort work. You imply to slam
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Nuff said
>community college members at all is unforgiveable. Are you advocating
>specifically reserving 100% of negative statements for non-cc-atendees?
No, I am stating (as opposed to implying) that being a cc-attendee is not
related to any generic reason for "slamming."
>I would put the homework server to work and cite the two lines of which my
>reply consisted, but since you decided to simply use me as an example to
>further your own crack-addled point, do yer own damn homework.
OK. You wrote:
*>It's a community college. Need I continue?
You have written off an entire segment of the population. That is what I
called bigotry. I will stand by it.
Individuals should be assessed individually. I have. Since your whole goal
in life is to instigate fighting, I will remove at least one opportunity for
you:
*plonk*
>Jeffrey "don't believe the pipe" Nelson
A pretty lame attack there Jeffy.
ija...@cmp.com
In article <5hurli$33n$1...@fremont.ohsu.edu>,
> >>>Isn't Jamie Lee Curtis a spokesperson for this phenomenon?
>
>
In one of my girlfriends bio classes at either Johns Hopkins or Stanford
(don't remember which), her professor told her about some celebrity who
was a spokesperson so-to-speak for testicular feminization and who had
testified to some committee (congressional?) about the condition.
I don't know (or care) if it was JLC, but the point is some professor at
a well-repsected university did use a specific name and did say that this
person wasn't hiding their condition.
-I-
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Christine Malcom
>for your auto-ire on this one. Lay off the crack. If you had read the
>at all in the first place, you would see that I didn't "[slam] someone who
>happens to be going to a community college". I didn't slam anyone.
I'm pretty sure that ineptitude isn't any more excuse than ignorance of
the law. I realize now, Jeffy, that I've been virtually
singl-handedly mucking up a perfectly wonderful lab exercise which may
answer an age-old question: If a little moron flames in the woods, but
there's nobody to hear him, does he make a sound?
Christine "Let's Watch!" Malcom-Dept. of Anthropology (cm...@kimbark.uchicago.edu)
____________________________________________________________________________
"Let the wild rumpus start!" - Maurice Sendak
Andrew Mobbs
Bob Hiebert <Bob.H...@worldnet.REMOVE.att.net> typed:
>I wrote:
>>>No you don't. Educational bigotry is inexcusable.
><stuff snipped that Andrew covers>
>
>Andrew Mobbs wrote:
>
> It *always* comes down to the individual,
>and can only be slightly influenced by the school.
I agree.
>I find Universities to be an inefficient method of information transfer.
>If I am really generous let's say it's 25% as efficient as "real world"
>experiences. That means a new college hire will gain the same amount of
>knowledge in the first year on the job as they got in four years of
>schooling. Within a couple of years after being hired, their "formal"
>education will be only a small part of what they use.
Of course an undergrad who's just been to a dozen lectures on C and
done a few practicals will know next to nothing about it. Things like
programming are only learnt by experiance, universities do offer the
facilites and enviroment which you can learn such things (if your
interested) without having to worry overly about deadlines.
Universities are able to teach material which is not immidiatly or
obviously useful, such as the theoretical side of computer science.
I'd hope that sometime during my career if I'm in a situation where the
obvious engineering solution isn't good enough I'll be able to at least
remember there's another way of solving the problem.
>Therefore, when I hire people I look to find those that hunger for
>knowledge, and didn't just specialize at schooling. That's true of college
>grads as well as people with 20 years experience. I am just not all that
>interested in what the name of the school was. The interview process tells
>me a lot more.
>
>The real issue here was Jeffry's comment. For 'Agin to start slamming
>someone who happens to be going to a community college is unforgiveable.
>There is no telling where that person will end up in life.
Quite, please don't think that by disagreeing with some of your points
I think he was right to say what he did.
Gerald Belton
Jeffrey Nelson / STILL AGIN' <jlne...@mole.uvm.edu> wrote:
>Come to think of it, I'm already doing you
>the favor of completely your sloppy retort work.
<snip>
>Read. Think. (Maybe) Post. Do Not Alter This Order.
Maybe there should be something in there about "proofreading." I
mean, that sentence I quoted above looks *sort of* like English, but I
just can't make any sense out of it.
Gerald "feeling pendantic today" Belton
gbe...@bellsouth.net
jon murray
ija...@cmp.com wrote:
>
>
> In one of my girlfriends bio classes at either Johns Hopkins or Stanford
> (don't remember which), her professor told her about some celebrity who
> was a spokesperson so-to-speak for testicular feminization and who had
> testified to some committee (congressional?) about the condition.
>
> I don't know (or care) if it was JLC, but the point is some professor at
> a well-repsected university did use a specific name and did say that this
> person wasn't hiding their condition.
Is this a troll? The argument on this thread was about the sin of
revealing medical details of patients, not reporting news stories.
Jon
*********
My address has been spam-protected.
It's 'netconnect' & I live in Australia (.au)
*********
Mary Shafer
I was accepted with honors at one of the top ten universities in the
US and was a member of the honors college there. I also spent one
summer enrolled at a community college, only we called them junior
colleges back then, satisfying the state-wide "American History and
Institutions" requirement, while I worked as a summer hire at a
well-known federal research agency.
So was I an inferior community college student, rejected by all real
universities, or was I an elite top-ten university student, recruited
by five other prestigious universities with offers of full-ride
scholarships?
--
Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR sha...@ursa-major.spdcc.com
URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html
Some days it don't come easy/And some days it don't come hard
Some days it don't come at all/And these are the days that never end....
ija...@cmp.com
In article <33532...@nextconnect.com>,
jo...@nextconnect.com wrote:
>
> Is this a troll? The argument on this thread was about the sin of
> revealing medical details of patients, not reporting news stories.
>
> Jon
>
No. I was saying that if this person did go public then there is no
ethics problem. And, according to the professor this person did go
public. I thought I was reinforcing the points made before.
hillary gorman
In <8620040...@dejanews.com>,
ija...@cmp.com <ija...@cmp.com> wrote:
*In article <33532...@nextconnect.com>,
* jo...@nextconnect.com wrote:
*>
*> Is this a troll? The argument on this thread was about the sin of
*> revealing medical details of patients, not reporting news stories.
*
*No. I was saying that if this person did go public then there is no
*ethics problem. And, according to the professor this person did go
*public. I thought I was reinforcing the points made before.
*
Back to the subject of the thread...
Here at the Penn vet school, the class of 2000 is currently taking
Veterinary Medical Genetics. Our professor was going over some "intersex"
conditions, and she took great care to point out that no, Jaimie Lee
Curtis did NOT have this problem...
--
hillary gorman......................................hillary@netaxs.com
If you need help, contact <sup...@netaxs.com>
"So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?"
Net Access...we got the clues, we got the funk, we got the bandwidth!
pterodactyl
hillary gorman wrote:
> > * jo...@nextconnect.com wrote:
> *>
> *> Is this a troll? The argument on this thread was about the sin of
> *> revealing medical details of patients, not reporting news stories.
> *
> *No. I was saying that if this person did go public then there is no
> *ethics problem. And, according to the professor this person did go
> *public. I thought I was reinforcing the points made before.
> *
> Back to the subject of the thread...
> Here at the Penn vet school, the class of 2000 is currently taking
> Veterinary Medical Genetics. Our professor was going over some "intersex"
> conditions, and she took great care to point out that no, Jaimie Lee
> Curtis did NOT have this problem...
>
> --
> hillary gorman......................................hillary@netaxs.com
> If you need help, contact <sup...@netaxs.com>
> "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?"
> Net Access...we got the clues, we got the funk, we got the bandwidth!
If your professor is a SHE, then it couldn't have been D.Patterson, or
U.Giger, or M. Haskins (they wouldn't pass that kind of crap to you
anyway). How do you suppose your professor knows this for a fact? Does
she moonlight as Ms. Curtis' family physician? Shouldn't you be learning
about grey collie syndrome, Chediak-Higashi syndrome, and why white cats
are often deaf?- - just how much is tuition there now, anyway? Really
getting your money's worth, aren't you? Hopefully, a shepherd with GDV
will ask you someday about Ms. Curtis, and lucky for you- you'll know
the answer!
danny burstein
>Back to the subject of the thread...
>Here at the Penn vet school, the class of 2000 is currently taking
>Veterinary Medical Genetics. Our professor was going over some "intersex"
>conditions, and she took great care to point out that no, Jaimie Lee
>Curtis did NOT have this problem...
Which, of course, brings up the obvious questions:
How would the perfessor know personal info about Ms. Curtis?
and, doubly ..
How would a v-e-t be involved in such things?
danny 'have to spell out that word the long way... my cat is next to me
and gets real worried whenever he sees/reads/hears it' burstein
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com