User talk:M.hin.ck/Dr. Money

Dr. Money and the Boy with No Penis

Please post a 250-word assessment of the sources used in the film "Dr. Money and the Boy with No Penis" below, discussing how the sources affected the tone and message of the film, for better and for worse. Due 4/10.

I think the sources used in this film affected the tone and message in two main ways. Firstly, the film had several instances of reenactments of non-transcribed interviews that took place between Brenda, sometimes Brenda and Brian, and Dr. Money. These instances, because it is unclear if they were perfectly true, tend to vilify Dr. Money. For example, these situations, such as when Dr. Money supposedly had the twins undress to discuss anatomical genitals and took photographs of them, these situations were narrated by David Reimer, in interviews before his death. His narration, his account, creates a foreboding tone, a sense of fear and anxiety that David, or Brenda, most likely felt during this time. These accounts, however, were juxtaposed, even competed against, by the first hand interviews with Dr. Richard Green, one of Money's prior students, who defends Money's work every time he speaks on screen. He claims that it s extremely important for children to understand the difference in genitalia to identify if they are a boy or a girl, defending Money's work and research at the time. These contradictory sources help to create a conflict in the intended message to the audience: was Dr. Money really in the wrong, were the Reimer parents in the wrong for potentially making a poor parental decision to rase their son as a daughter, are the accounts from David Reimer true? Using sources such as mother Janet Reimer, David's wife Jane, and his friend Harold help to make viewers sympathize with David's life, but just the addition of Richard Green creates this contrasting tone, one that highlights the work of Dr. Money instead of the tragedy of the Reimer twins' lives. Mtesta4 (talk) 14:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)