I thought it appropriate to start a new thread here in regards to intergender.
Sonofmysoul seems to be interested in discussing this subject. I have sent an email in regards to my own general ideas on the subject.

This is my following address:

Intergender. What is its frequentcy? If you look at http://www.intersexualite.org/Misconceptions.html
They do not give any statistics. If there is an ***igned team at hospitals that do choose sex, there should be some way in which to track the frequency at those hospitals. If you take into consideration that these doctrors are specialists, I am sure many other doctors would refer to the big city doctors. Hence the amount of lives births at that hospital alone in comparison to the cases in which these specialists work on... despite the website's citing as myth that 1/2000 are intersex is laughable. It is even more laughable since they do not provide concreate details to refute it. It is a special interest website so the biase is going to be considerable, in which cases, if they were to be given several studies, I have no doubt that they would select as an example the studies that best fit their political agenda and downplay or ignore confounding variables.

Regardless of the frequency, your questions will remain for those in such a situation. But what is the real motivation behind such questions? Is it really in the pursuit of truth or it is a pursuit for another end, as perhaps to attempt to believe truth exists apart from truth, to universalize salvation and make it meaningless? I do not know, nor can I see the motivation of the heart. I would say that a majority of people who attempt to justify ****sexuality by using the intergender argument are not about the pursuit of truth, but a rearranging of some parts of truth to make their hypothesis to be truthful despite the truths they ignore, downplay, ridicule, or even attacking the messenger rather than the truthful message.

So perhaps you are the minority. The first principle I always try to address is the natural order should there be no complications. The way things should be. This is what I would address if the audience is not Christian. For the Christian, God is the maker of the natural order and as such, his word is more authoritative than science, since when science discovers by observation, a whole new realm of questions comes into play that are not answered. Therefore, for the Christian, it is a matter of a guiding principle that does not change due to politics, or science, or any other pressure. Even when some science is affirmed correctly, it is a matter of our relationship to God which the Church remains clearly in the right. I say this because Thomas Aquinas model of movement in his argument for the existence of God was based on bad science. The principle of the argument remains true though.

So, as far as the advances of medicine is concerned, new technologies and advancements generate new discussions on morality and ethics. So let us go back before this alternate surgery aspects. In a matter of principle, parents, doctors, and politicians are not God. God created the intergender person. So the first priority of that person is not sexuality, but personhood. Christ died for that individual as he died for everyone. It would be my own personal position, should such a child be born into my family, to not have the doctor pick the sex until it is clearly into ****rty which of the reproductive organs is going to win out. The complications from giving a name, how to incorporate them into the school system, and numerous other aspects would be difficult, but not impossible. I would give the child's name a gender neutral name. There are a lot of Irish names that are suitable as Shannon, and other names like Tony or Toni. They would in our day and age be placed into special education and more than likely would not be recommended for inclusion due to the severity of issues with other peer children. However, inclusion might be possible should the IEPs work well within special education and socially they gain acceptance until the future time where doctors do not have to second quess the gender that will win out. Toys would be a problem. I suppose I would be more accepting of a Tom Boy should the female gender win out than to make a boy effeminate. My wife is very much a Tom Boy growing up playing basketball, but is now very feminine. So I think such would be better to raise similiar to a boy than to a girl. Of course, homeschooling would be another option at least until surgery. If even possible, I might even wait until the child is full grown before surgery is done so that the organs fully develop and are much larger so the surgery will have less complications. I am unsure how much better it is to do surgery at a younger age, with organs being so small; would this have a greater impact on doctor malpractice giving the precision needed for such small organs. What other issues might arise? Calling he instead of she? I have even heard women at times call their girlfriends "buddy" or in the masculine form. Tom Boy is therefore much easier, calling the prospective female a male until the time it is determined that the female organ is the dominate gender.

This my own addition:

As far as experiencing normal human experience, there is no such thing. Equality is a principle, not a reality. We should try to treat everyone with equality, but clearly we do not and cannot. If we would, even the sever autistic child should be completely inclusive; however, they distrupt the flow of progress that the other children have. Then there are gifted children, who are held back in the regular cl*** because they do not have the same opportunities afforded them as families that can afford alternate schools.