Goodenough Gismo

  • Gismo39
    This is the classic children's book, Goodenough Gismo, by Richmond I. Kelsey, published in 1948. Nearly unavailable in libraries and the collector's market, it is posted here with love as an "orphan work" so that it may be seen and appreciated -- and perhaps even republished, as it deserves to be. After you read this book, it won't surprise you to learn that Richmond Irwin Kelsey (1905-1987) was an accomplished artist, or that as Dick Kelsey, he was one of the great Disney art directors, breaking your heart with "Pinocchio," "Dumbo," and "Bambi."

  • 74%How Addicted to Blogging Are You?

  • Google

Blogs I love and/or learn from

« To Each His Own (Luxury) | Main | Did You Ever Notice That "Meme" is "Me Me"? [UPDATED] »



Heh heh.

Wasn't this a Joan Rivers movie about 30 years ago, with Billy Crystal as the pregnant man?

It was called "Rabbit Test" and it had one really funny line. A reporter is asking Billy Crystal, "Will you be having a Caesarian, or in your case, a Cleopatran?"


I'm still hoping against hope that the whole thing is an elaborate April Fool's Day joke, or something set up by Ashton Kutcher's new TV prank series.

Peter Hoh

Even if it's not a fake, what's the big deal?

So a person, born with a uterus, who has taken testosterone and appears to be a man, is pregnant. So what?


Okay, now that I've read the article and looked at his/her chest, I can see that this is a guy the way the "Chicks With D***s" who used to advertise on Channel 35 were chicks.


Yeah . . . it isn't Photoshop, it's chop shop (ouch). And people are a tad concerned about what all that testosterone is doing to the baby.

Selfishness knows no bounds.


To me, assuming this is all real and not an elaborate practical joke, this is proof of the old adage, you can't fool Mother Nature.

If you're born with XX chromosomes, a vagina and a uterus, you are, by definition, a female, no matter what you can convince the state to put on your driver's license.


It may be no big deal to some, but it sure is fugly, if you ask me.

Hey, want to really screw w/kids minds-- show them this and "let's discuss it in class".

Holy crap. It gives me the willies, but then- i'm pretty unenlightened when it comes to nuance:0).


This really is quite the experiment, isn't it? After reading the story in the Advocate the other day, I did a cursory Google on testosterone and side affects, and looked at what sorts of warnings they put on some substances containing testosterone. Pause-giving. Of course, the article makes the point that Beatie went off testosterone for some months before getting pregnant the first time, and then, obviously additional time passed. I have no clue how long testosterone--that is, the sort taken artifically, not the self-producing kind--stays in the body. Does anyone around here? (Is there a doctor in the house, or an endocrinologist?)

In the Advocate article, Beatie mentions going through nine doctors before he and Nancy opted for home insemination. The implication is that this is due pretty much to prejudice and ignorance. But there may also have been other issues, don't you think?

And the publicity! What's the agenda behind that? Certainly not the best interests of the baby (if someone can make a counterargument on that specific point, I'd like to hear it; but so far, that's defeated my not-inconsiderable powers of imagination). Might not privacy have served, and continue to serve, the child better?

It seems to me that Beatie wants to make a statement, to be a statement, and to have his daughter be one, too. See, for example (in the Advocate article), "But our situation ultimately will ask everyone to embrace the gamut of human possibility and to define for themselves what is normal." Helluva deck of cards to be handed before you've even hit the birth canal. By my lights, the person handing out that deck shows signs of a serious lack of maturity, in parenting terms.

Fascinating, a statement Beatie made just a few sentences earlier, in the Advocate article:

"... In a technical sense I see myself as my own surrogate, though my gender identity as male is constant. ..." [Emphasis added.]

How rife with implications is that?


You know, open-minded is one thing, it's of high value for me, and though I'm not perfect, it's one of my strengths--and I think most people I've known IRL would agree with that.

But there comes a point when one can become so open-minded that one's brains fall out. This strikes me as one of those.

Shorter version of my comment? What Amba said: Selfishness knows no bounds.

Poor kid.


I found this troubling:

Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights. Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire.

We don't have a right to children. Children are gifts. I have to say reader and I are on the same page. For multiple reasons, this just comes across as "all about MEEEEEEE."


karen... could you avoid using the term "willie" when speaking on transgender issues? Brings up disturbing images in my mind... ;-)

In all seriousness, I don't begrudge anybody choosing to live how they want to live. If you are so convinced that you are really a male that you want to remove your breasts, spend the rest of your life injecting yourself with hormones, and wear nothing but grunge-era clothing, be my guest. But don't ask the rest of us to create entirely new legal categories based on your entirely subjective self-identification, and don't blame us for thinking that maybe there's a little more wrong with you than just your gender self-identity.

You know, there's a syndrome where people suddenly believe their arm or their leg is possessed, or is not a part of them, and they demand that it be amputated, sometimes even self-amputating it. Why aren't those folks seen as simply having a different body-identity than the rest of us?


Why aren't those folks seen as simply having a different body-identity than the rest of us?

Pat, maybe it's because of all of the behaviors and "shoulds" attached (still) to different gender roles. I.e., "Women aren't funny. Okay, then, pretty women aren't funny. Okay, then, uh...funny women aren't pretty."

What separates mentally healthy people from not so mentally healthy people is I didn't cut off my nose to spite my face.


Nor, I suspect, did you cut anything else off either, Melinda, which was my basic point.

And I do realize that, in the U.S. and among reputable surgeons, there are a multitude of checkpoints set up to make sure that the only people given such trans-gendered surgeries are those who really, truly, and over a substantial period of time feel that they were born of the "wrong" sex.

Incidentally, I would point out that, as I understand it, the male-to-female surgeries are much more successful at recreating the downstairs plumbing than the female-to-male. It's easier to turn a penis into a vagina than vice versa.... proving once again that our society favors the (genetic) male. ;-)


Pat: It means it's easier to return the default setting to "female."


lol... touche'


I was talking about the means of "reversal" w/a young friend of mine. I want to know: Does one give up orgasmic sex to become what they believe they are meant to be by re-arranging everything they were given to be who they think they aren't? Doesn't this take away natural satisfaction?

Anyway- it isn't the fact that they shouldn't be who they think they are; it's that they have to totally re-create out of who they already are to get something else. The state of being is already complex enough. I read @Althouse or somewhere a quote by one gal(maybe a Lesbian) that we are all different degrees of straight/gay. I totally agree w/that and actually think it's pretty cool. This? Puts a whole new definition to "choice".

PatHMV- no more w/the wi~~ies. You are too imaginative for your own good, sometimes :0).


Thinking about the sterilization aspect, sounds like "he" left his plumbing ~as is~? Hence: orgasmic sex.


karen, I think (and my education on this sort of thing is mostly picked up from watching Nip/Tuck or the occasional I can't turn away show on one of the medical channels) that with the most modern male-to-female techniques, the individual is capable of orgasm after the operation. The nerve connections of the penis are preserved and basically part of the penis itself becomes the vagina.

And, for the record, I know more about this subject than I really want to...


karen... that's correct. "He" chose to not have the down south area surgically altered. The female-to-male surgery isn't nearly as good, from what I understand. Harder to add something rather than take it away, I guess.


Thanks, Pat. I should probably be thankful we get only 4or5 channels on TV.

Hmmmm- who says you can't "have your cake& ..." ;0).


I wonder if "he" will lactate? Hey- i'm a farmer!!! Plus- will "his" mothering instincts kick in?

Lord, the thought of all this is really messin' me up. ~sigh~ Up is down...


Speaking of farms... back on the farm where I lived out my tender formative golden years, we had a method for determining up from down, this from that, and hims from hers:

We'd just lift up the subject's tail and have a quick look. Pretty much worked every time. No arguing, and no phony hormones.


I haven't stopped by here for a while and now after reading all this I don't know whether to be glad I came, or not. To think I missed Oprah...thank heavens!

I just finished writing a comment on another blogger's story post that I thought required some explanation there could actually be biological reasons for gender identification issues for some individuals. Now, I have all this to sort out in my thoughts -- isn't this taking things a bit too far? Reads like selfishness big time.

Yeah, much to be said for the "lift the tail" process, but I had a problem figuring out baby chicks 'til they got older.


I hate to tell you this, but I don't think you missed Oprah . . . I think it's today.

Society used to tell everybody to suck it up and suffer. Now it indulges everybody. Is there such a thing as a happy medium? Where is it?


"Is there such a thing as a happy medium? Where is it?"

It's right here at AmbivaBlog! Silly.


Meade, a lots changed since the golden years, i'm afraid. And, there is such a thing as a "freemartin"- a heifer calf born sterile when twinned w/a bullcalf. :0(.

And, so??????????? Did anyone watch the Oprah show??

weird facts

It's so silly article. Cause basically it's just a woman, who looks like man ?
What's so awesome about it ?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

New on FacTotem, my Natural History Blog

Jacques' Story: Escape From the Gulag

The AmbivAbortion Rant

Debating Intelligent Design


  • Listed on Blogwise

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2004