FL FL - Clermont, WhtMale UP6030, 24-32, transgender, breast implants, Sep'88

Murkywaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
3,645
WTmD36k.png

Sketch of the descendent.

I can't find a thread on this case, or any DoeNetwork page either. However fascinating news.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-unidentified-lake-county-20151110-story.html
The woman wore a greenish tank top with a long acid-washed skirt and pantyhose that were partially rolled down. She had long manicured nails, long dyed blonde hair and breast implants. A lab determined she likely gave birth to one or more children before the body was found Sept. 25, 1988, along County Road 474 in Four Corners.

Just one problem: The person they found was actually a transgender woman.
 
WTmD36k.png

Sketch of the descendent.

I can't find a thread on this case, or any DoeNetwork page either. However fascinating news.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-unidentified-lake-county-20151110-story.html

Did they actually say that the guy gave birth? Are you serious? And how many bodies has this lab worked on?


The woman wore a greenish tank top with a long acid-washed skirt and pantyhose that were partially rolled down. She had long manicured nails, long dyed blonde hair and breast implants. A lab determined she likely gave birth to one or more children before the body was found Sept. 25, 1988, along County Road 474 in Four Corners.

Just one problem: The person they found was actually a transgender woman.
 
The article I read explained that they thought she had given birth because of pitting or other changes to the pelvic bones. That's something that used to be viewed as a sign of previous childbirth, which science has since shown not to be reliable. Makes me wonder how many other UIDs (who are originally biologically female) are said to have had children but actually didn't.
 
Why does namus list her as male? I find that very wrong and disrespectful to the whole trans community. Besides that, if she was presenting as female (by that I mean wearing female clothes, living her life as female) then it would make more sense to try and match her case with missing females.
 
Why does namus list her as male? I find that very wrong and disrespectful to the whole trans community. Besides that, if she was presenting as female (by that I mean wearing female clothes, living her life as female) then it would make more sense to try and match her case with missing females.

I'm on the fence about it. On one hand, I also find it disrespectful. On the other, even though she had reassignment surgery, she would still be genetically male. Also, perhaps she is listed as male because they think someone may make the match based on remembering her as a man. (If she disappeared before she lived as a woman.) It's tricky. I wish they could either list her under both (for search purposes) or create a new category.
 
I'm on the fence about it. On one hand, I also find it disrespectful. On the other, even though she had reassignment surgery, she would still be genetically male. Also, perhaps she is listed as male because they think someone may make the match based on remembering her as a man. (If she disappeared before she lived as a woman.) It's tricky. I wish they could either list her under both (for search purposes) or create a new category.

And since there wasn't a very accepting attitude towards transgender people then, I believe that a missing person's report would simply list her as a cross-dressing male.
 
The article I read explained that they thought she had given birth because of pitting or other changes to the pelvic bones. That's something that used to be viewed as a sign of previous childbirth, which science has since shown not to be reliable. Makes me wonder how many other UIDs (who are originally biologically female) are said to have had children but actually didn't.

That doesn't make sense. You need a uterus to give birth, wear on genetically male pelvic bones is not indicative of childbirth. They should have realized that back then. But since they haven't, they should change that info now since it is clearly incorrect.
 
Intersex individuals can have the reproductive organs to have children but it is rather rate. Also, their hormone levels may not be right to bear children. At college I participate in our feminist and gender studies society. I will try to get more info on the issue, though I can't promise anything as I don't want to upset anyone by asking sensitive questions!
 
That doesn't make sense. You need a uterus to give birth, wear on genetically male pelvic bones is not indicative of childbirth. They should have realized that back then. But since they haven't, they should change that info now since it is clearly incorrect.

Right, but what I'm saying it that's why they thought she was biologically female--she had the pits on her pelvic bones. Now they know that other things (like high levels of estrogen) can cause that, but they didn't know that then. Since her remains were decomposing, she likely wouldn't have had a uterus or other organs left.

Pits on the pelvis were found, which once was thought to indicate a person had given birth. Warren said it’s rare to see it in men, but this person would have been taking high amounts of estrogen during a gender transition.

http://www.watermarkonline.com/2015...ns-body-found-in-lake-county-was-transgender/
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

Could it be possible she had this disorder? Women with CAIS have a Y chromosome but appear as female. They usually don't have a uterus.
From what I read they said she had undergone several cosmetic surgeries including breast implants and a nose job. And noted that gender reassignment surgeries in the 1980s were even more expensive than they are nowadays. Which today, a male to female gender reassignment surgery costs between $7,000 to $24,000. They are speculating she might have been an escort to have paid for all the surgeries.
 
I agree that this whole case is very confusing and I am surprised that the lab would make a mistake like this!
Am I correct in thinking that the Transgender community wouldn't have been as big or as open in 1988, compared to nowadays?
If that is the case, then it's weird that noone is missing this lady!
 
I agree that this whole case is very confusing and I am surprised that the lab would make a mistake like this!
Am I correct in thinking that the Transgender community wouldn't have been as big or as open in 1988, compared to nowadays?
If that is the case, then it's weird that noone is missing this lady!

the trans community was not so well accepted as it is now back then. though they are still not treated very fairly in society.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
2,221
Total visitors
2,410

Forum statistics

Threads
589,954
Messages
17,928,223
Members
228,016
Latest member
ignoreme123
Back
Top