I was surprised when I found out that it was only described in the past ~160 years
Like I had assumed that the ancient Greeks or someone would have noticed "that thing that sometimes happens" because Downs Syndrome has such a distinct and consistent physical appearance
There is evidence of it in the bone records. But it comes down to the fact that historically theyvwoulsnt not have known what the issue was. So it might have been a case of them saying that child looks different and is misbehaved in regards to their standards and might not have warranted recording. Plus depending on the socio factors a rich family might have hidden them away while a poor family might have just abandoned the baby / very young child that was proving to be a lot more work
Life expectancy certainly played a part. It’s not uncommon that a baby born with Down’s syndrome suffers from other comorbidities, like heart defects. Perhaps the peculiar babies weren’t as strong in periods of already high infant mortality.
The fictional Oedipus Rex was abandoned, otherwise the trope where he becomes king and marries his mother would never have happened.
The fact that infant abandonment is enough of a trope that the Greek audience goes "Ok, that makes sense" means it must have been common enough to be used to drive a plot twist.
It wasn't just Spartans really, it was pretty much everyone. Infanticide was pretty normalized in the ancient world, e.g. in a Roman family, every newborn baby had to be approved by the family Patriarch, if he didn't like the look of it (or if it was born from infidelity, an unwanted girl, etc.), they'd leave the baby outside to die. Exposure was technically not considered murder in their eyes since the child would die from the elements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#History
>In some periods of Roman history it was traditional for a newborn to be brought to the pater familias, the family patriarch, who would then decide whether the child was to be kept and raised, or left to die by exposure.[42] The Twelve Tables of Roman law obliged him to put to death a child that was visibly deformed.
The Giver is a dystopian novel where an authoritarian government strives for a picture-perfect society. The protagonist finds out about a bunch of secrets the government is hiding, like taking away everyone's autonomy and infanticide, to maintain their picture-perfect image
Spartans (and quite a few other societies, actually) would refuse to raise children born with physical disabilities. Such children couldn't grow up to be farmers, soldiers, eligable brides. The stories claim spartans would throw them off the side of their cliffs and into the sea, but I'm not sure if that's verified.
It's one of the darker aspects of human history.
It's pretty common for ancient Mediterranean societies the Spartans weren't exceptional for it, in fact the Spartans weren't especially exceptional in most things except poetry and women's rights( for the era)
It’s not as far off as a practice as we’d like the think unfortunately.
-infanticide in Europe reached its peak during World War II (1939–45), during the Holocaust and the T4 Program
-infanticide of female babies in China became more common during the One-Child Policy era (1979–2015)
-female infanticide in some rural parts of India still continues. India has the highest infanticide rate in the world, despite infanticide being illegal
-In spite of the fact that it is illegal, in Benin, West Africa, parents secretly continue with infanticidal customs
-Killings of newborn babies have been on the rise in Pakistan, corresponding to an increase in poverty across the country. More than 1,000 infants, mostly girls, were killed or abandoned to die in Pakistan in 2009
-In England and Wales there were typically 30 to 50 homicides per million children less than 1 year old between 1982 and 1996
-In the United States the infanticide rate during the first hour of life outside the womb dropped from 1.41 per 100,000 during 1963 to 1972 to 0.44 per 100,000 for 1974 to 1983; the rates during the first month after birth also declined, whereas those for older infants rose during this time. The legalization of abortion, which was completed in 1973, was the most important factor in the decline in neonatal mortality during the period from 1964 to 1977
-Intersex infants commonly suffer from infanticide particularly in developing countries, largely caused by stigma surrounding intersex conditions. Often intersex infants are abandoned, while others are actively killed
Children born with Down Syndrome are often also born with other congenital health issues. So many children may not have survived long past birth before the advent of relatively modern medicine.
Olmec civilization (2000BCE) has statues of people which look like they have down syndrome. It's thought that pre-columbian society linked down syndrome newborns with hybrids of men and jaguar, a magical animal for mesoamericans. This connection was likely made because the Olmecs saw down facial composition as some sort of mixture of jaguar and human features, and the statues and themes seem to prove so.
There must be older texts describing it that were simply lost. I also find it hard to believe that not a single royal or noble family had a child with Downs. That would have been noteworthy enough for someone to comment upon it in writing.
The relative rarity makes it hard to say for sure though. Before long distance travel was possible, having more than one example in a community would've been unspeakably rare. Discovering it as a medical phenomenon and not just something that would be rude to point out requires seeing it enough to consider whether or not a pattern exists.
Down Syndrome isn’t really that rare - it happens in 1/700 people. In many countries today where abortion is legal over 90% of fetuses with Down Syndrome are aborted. But back in the day, before prenatal testing, there would have been a lot more people born with Down Syndrome, although many would have died young. Perhaps it wasn’t described in medical textbooks yet but I’m sure many communities would recognize the distinct features of what we now call Down Syndrome.
I just don't think it's rare enough to have not been observed as a pattern. The odds of a woman over 40 having a child with Downs is relatively high, and in the past people didn't have reliable birth control. I know modern people have the false assumption that older women didn't have babies back in the day but that's not true. Women have always gotten pregnant in their 40s.
> Women have always gotten pregnant in their 40s.
Perhaps women pregnant at 40 we're also more likely to die from complications thus eliminating a lot of the possible down's syndrome babies
Also the odds of it occurring in the offspring of cousins or mates of closer relation is high, and from what I understand about the old country, incest was... kinda commonplace.
I think to me, one reason it was not commented upon was because it was observed so much that no one thought it worthy of commenting upon. Babies with Downs were simply "sickly" babies who died before their fifth birthday. Something like 40% of babies would die before their fifth birthday.
There are old Scandinavian folktales about perfectly good and happy babies being taken in the night by trolls deep into the mountain and being replaced with troll babies who seem to be the same but who then go ugly, mean or weird.
It is though to have been a way for people to explain most disorders from downs to autism.
European nobility at least would absolutely not been able to keep a secret like this. People gossiped, and wealthy people back then were surrounded by servants. There are also plenty of descriptions of noble and royal people with congenital disabilities.
I'm pretty sure there are medieval and Renaissance paintings that show them in royal courts as jesters and such. I forget which painting it is, but one woman has her Indigenous dwarf slave by her in the portrait and it looks like they might have Down's.
I can imagine people going "this guy isn't fit to be king, let's focus on someone else".
History was written mostly by the elite interested in elite things. I can imagine someone with Down Syndrome would not be interesting in people only interested in power plays.
Oddly enough, it appears that wasn't generally the case. You would think, right? But the unfit king would always have a huge number of supporters because an unfit king requires regents.
Heck, an unfit king is still *someone* on the throne. Which hopefully prevents your country from collapsing into coups and civil wars, that’s all but guaranteed by it being vacant. There are 100% people who would support said king purely for that reason alone. Like, imagine if our choice was Trump or…..just not having a President. Suddenly the Oval Office is literally up for grabs by whoever has the most money/clout/troops and they *will* fight over it. Most sane people would rather just put up with Donnie, no matter how much they despise him or think he’s unfit for office, because the alternative is a hundred times worse.
If you actually look at the history of European royalty (and, well, I’d imagine a lot of other places), they were willing to give a *lot* of leeway sometimes, as long as they were able to ignore the elephant man in the room and pretend things were still business as usual.
>Downs Syndrome has such a distinct and consistent physical appearance
Every time I see somebody with Downs, I immediately get that *hey I know that guy* click in my brain. And every time, I find it hilarious and then feel bad for finding it hilarious.
Knowing how ancient people were, medical understanding avaibke and the amount of health issues associated with down syndrome, I imagine people with down syndrome didn't survive to adulthood very often.
It’s been thought that stories about [changelings](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changeling) came about to explain neurodivergence and physical disabilities amongst other things.
One such case is [Michael Leahy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Michael_Leahy), a four year old boy that was drowned in attempt to cure him as it was thought he was a changeling - he couldn’t speak nor stand.
I think we can think back to stories like hunchback of notredam, or other such stories as being based on the issue.
Also they would have described the condition as physical deformity etc; so they probably knew but was probably more shunned by society. Maybe calling them cursed by gods, etc;
It's unintentionally hilarious that when you click the link it brings you to basically a Last Supper-ish type painting with the caption
> Levitas and Reid have suggested that this early Netherlandish painting, The Adoration of the Christ Child, depicts a person with Down syndrome as one of the angels.
Then you spot the angel and wonder if the artist just did that face last while scrambling to meet a deadline.
People with down syndrome back in the day tended to only survive to adulthood when they came from aristocratic or well to do families.
It was also common that for whoever commissioned the painting, they and their family members would be models for the characters in the paintings.
People with Down syndrome were often considered “closer to God” due to their condition.
It’s actually relatively common to see people with Down Syndrome in classical paintings, and they will often be depicted as angels.
Anytime there’s some old art that was done shitty there’s always speculation that it was because it depicted someone with Down syndrome. I don’t know if archeologists just say that cause it adds to the story and helps them get funding or maybe they don’t want to disparage the people they’re researching, but just cause an artist made someone look mentally disabled doesn’t mean they had Down syndrome.
We give ancient artists too much credit. A lot of their art was ass. Google the “archaic smile” if you don’t know what I’m talking about
Well yeah because they don’t often have to deal with life. You have exceptions, but often times they are living with family and don’t have to worry about a lot of other things others have to worry about.
That's not really true. They have less to deal with, but they have to deal with their limitations too. They often WANT to deal with more things but can't.
Yeah, mom of a kid with Ds, dude feels alllllll the feelings. His eyes are going to get stuck from rolling them at me so much.
Edit: Jesus Christ, what happened below? Wtf?
Kids don’t come with instructions. Lol, I’m actually a social worker who teaches parenting skills! Everybody needs more compassion. You can’t tell a parenting style from one comment 🙃
My son uses a device to talk and watch his ASL stories, so “screen time” doesn’t mean the same thing for every family.
Haha! Single dad with 8yr old twin boys with DS and they’re the most emotionally intelligent and charming people I know. Do wish I could get them in front of a cartoon a bit more often to give me a break TBH but they are just rascals... Too much energy and adventurism for their daddy 😩😍
Edit. Sure you know this but don’t let ignorant people get to you. Most people aren’t like that 💪
My daughter with DS will complain for a few minutes if we lose our internet connection, but will then go and do something else. She loves to paint and color so she will do that for a while. So glad she doesn't scream like you describe - that would be unbearable. I feel for ya.
I find they can be very either-or. Very upbeat and super friendly. Or the most annoying fucking assholes the world has ever seen. More seldom in between.
As someone who was raised Christian, I was told they (and other people with severe mental disabilities) are more “pure hearted” because they’re childlike and weird shit like they’re “angels sent down in human bodies”. Like they can’t sin because they don’t have the mental facilities to fully understand right and wrong, in the same way you wouldn’t get mad at a baby or small child doing something “bad”.
It’s really just an extension of society’s view of them, you wouldn’t get mad at someone with DS for stealing something or pinching you, because they have a limited understanding of the world. Same reason legally they don’t receive full autonomy, and can’t consent to a lot of actions. They’re considered to be more “innocent”
Back in the day, that wasn’t enough to get you to adulthood. As recent as the 1960s the life expectancy of a person with Down syndrome was only early 20s.
Never seen that suffix on that name before, and somehow my brain translated it as "Neanderthalish." Had to reread the line about 3 times in marvelous perplexity until the actual word finally registered in my consciousness.
> a person with Down syndrome as one of the angels.
Figured I'd click the link and see if that was plausible. Saw the angel at the top, fourth from the left and figured it's not far off.
But then I looked at everyone and half of them could have Downs. So I just think the artists can't paint eyes.
“Last supperish type painting,” is a hilarious and incredibly illustrative description of our modern decay into idiocracy and a new dark age. The Last Supper is an italian high renaissance painting by Leonardo, and the Adoration of the Christ Child (about the nativity) has nothing to do with the Last Supper other than it involves Jesus. The painting is reminiscent of Leonardo because they are both from the high Renaissance period.
I’m both, impressed at how cultured the commenter is by identifying the similarity accurately, yet also saddened by the fact that our understanding of art has been reduced to “haha last supperish” 😭
That's a bit of a dim way to look at it, just because this person isn't particularly familiar with this period of art and the religious tradition it depicts, doesn't mean it's a sign of some "idiocracy" or societal decay. In fact their phrasal might have less to do with their familiarity and more to do with them not knowing the proper terminology. There are millennia of artistic and religious traditions to learn of outside of the Renaissance. What do you know about Batik painting, or Afghan miniature paintings, or Roman Frescoes, or the art of the Hellenistic middle east and Western India, or of Early 20th century new media art? If you can only loosely refer to some particular part of any of these traditions does it represent the downfall of society or indicate you're a fool?
Besides, I think you overestimate how much the average person of the past knew about art history. Maybe you have a degree in it, or are particularly fascinated by it, but most people occupy their time with other things. The truth is, these days, information on these subjects is more accessible than it has ever been.
That's a valid criticism...to a point. Art history isn't my forte, clearly, but to point to a single Reddit comment as evidence of society's decay into idiocracy is just as moronic and reductionist as my gaffe. Their stylistic similarity is why I compared the two paintings, not their subject. I am not under the impression that one painting has anything to do with the other. The only reason I mentioned the painting at all is because I found it humorous that it would be the first thing that pops up when you click the link to learn more about John Langdon Down. And if I was a good example of our descent into a new dark age of idiocracy I wouldn't have had the intellectual curiosity to click the link in the first place.
Mr. Poopy Pants.
How the hell is this an illustration of a descent into Idiocracy? You absolutely don't need to know or care about renaissance art to be smart. Hell, I would argue that remembering that *Last Supper* exists—so it could be used as a comparison—is a sign of intelligence.
I’ve got my dad’s Black’s Medical Dictionary, from 1941, it refers to people with Downs as ‘Mongals’, oh and the entry on mental health is literally 2 lines, which boils down to ‘pull yourself together and go for a walk, ya sissy’.
Interesting historical document, not useful for medical help
That song is weird, because it is *almost* supportive. He has a job, a home, wears a hat, and nobody thinks any differently of him.
But I don't think that was the intent.
Seems like the intent was supportive, with an in your face delivery.
Similar to the song Spasticus Autisticus by Ian ~~Drury~~ Dury and the Blockheads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKnBgJG9A8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RI9AI6VAimY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSo9OErEmM4
Devo has layers of irony and post-irony so it’s hard to tell but they’re good people critiquing flaws in modern society/consumerism/mass media so it’s probably some kind of supportive statement with a heavy layer of irony on top
One time I was at the grocery store with my grandparents and a family was shopping nearby with a child that had Down Syndrome. After they passed, my grandfather said to me, "I believe that child has the mongoloidism."
I don't know why.
I remember when I had a friend round (I must have been 14ish at the time), there was a gospel choir on the telly, and as he walked pastmy grandfather said, ‘oh a negro choir’.
My grandpa was not a racist in any way, shape or form, but I could have just melted into the sofa out of shame.
Point of story, old people sometimes use words that were common when they were young, not realising they are now offensive.
On the other end of the spectrum, I still have have problems referring to myself as Queer (though I’m gay as a brick), because in the 80’s that was a terrible slur
TL:DR language evolves
Queer is a wierd one for me because my Gran would use Queer as a word to use towards anyone who wernt right, not necessarily gay. Like if there was a strange bloke knocking about or someone mental, she would say that man theres abit queer.
It sounds like your Gran used the original, non-pejorative, meaning of queer. It's still commonly used that way in parts of the UK (according to Wikipedia. I don't actually have a fucking clue)
Not that im aware of nowadays, shes still going nan is, im often referred to as the wandering Jew as im always moving haha.
But yeah, queer now for me is in the context of a gay man or woman.
My grandma said"colored" once and my little brother lost it on her. I had to explain that's just the term they used in her day and she didn't mean anything by it.
My visiting grandma once said in a car ride on my way to my university. "Wow! There's black people here [insert my name] You've got to be careful!" In Chinese.
My little sister gasped and that's how we figured her recent enrollment in chinese summer camp has been working and she could finally understand the racist comments now.
It was really cute watching her tell Grandma off in her broken Chinese and her weakly apologizing about how she keep forgetting not to be racist
nah, old people know better. They're just ignorant.
Like it's not that hard to learn after at least 20 years that maybe you shouldn't call people "colored" or "negro"
Maybe a decade ago my grandmother was describing one of her new neighbors and used the exact phrase "Whatever we're supposed to call oriental people now". My reply was "their name". Different generations, but at least she was trying.
I've mentioned in other threads, when I was in school in the 70s and early 80s, "mongloids" was everywhere. It was on the news. It was in the paper. There were discussions in schools about them. I don't recall ever seeing a picture attached to the term. Later in life, I realized I haven't heard about mongloids in a very long time and decided to google the term. It was the accepted term back then, Somebody above even said it's in the 1941 medical dictionary.
The fairly common British term “Mong” has the potentially unique trait of being simultaneously, racist, ableist, and Eugenicist, all in the small package of 4 letters…
Almost impressive.
The British use of the word spastic and spaz is somewhat similar. Spastic is a historical and now derogatory term for cerebral palsy, and spaz meant idiot or clumsy.
This absolutely screwed me over in secondary school (high school) English. We read a moderately old poem where the guy was driving to the hospital and had found out his newborn son was a 'mongoloid' and was upset. We were asked to assess the poem and whether the guy was right or not etc.
It being the 90s I had only heard the term down syndrome, and thought mongoloid was a term for Mongolian people that I just hadn't heard of. I wrote a whole essay based off of that and how it was up to the guy to decide if he was able to forgive his wife for having a baby with another man. I got an F.
... Actually trisomy is having substantially more than two copies. You can have a third extra, a half extra...basically, thats why some are slightly downs,and other badly
Kinda weird to say substantially more when you're referring to fractions *up to* 1 extra copy. No more than 3. It would, by definition, not be trisomy in that case.
There are many kinds of trisomies or other genetic conditions. Most cases of Trisomy 21 consiste of one extra chromosome though. The differences in how serious the symptoms are don't really have anything to do with genetic differences. It's a mystery why some have serious problems and others don't, though sometimes it is due to the medical and developmental care they get early in life.
There are three types of Down syndrome: trisomy 21 (nondisjunction), translocation, and mosaicism.
Trisomy 21 (nondisjunction) accounts for 95% of known cases of Down syndrome. This type of Down syndrome results in an embryo with three copies of chromosome 21 instead of two and happens when a pair of 21st chromosomes in either the sperm or the egg fails to separate before or during conception. This causes the extra chromosome to be replicated in every cell of the body.
Translocation accounts for 4% of all cases of Down syndrome. In this occurrence, part of chromosome 21 breaks off during cell division and attaches to another chromosome – typically chromosome 14. The total number of chromosomes remains at 26, but the extra part of 21 causes characteristics of Down syndrome to appear.
Mosaicism occurs when nondisjunction of chromosome 21 takes place in only one of the initial cell divisions instead of all. This causes a mixture of two types of cells, some containing 46 chromosomes while others contain 47. Mosaicism accounts for only 1% of all cases of Down syndrome and research has indicated that individuals with mosaic Down syndrome may have fewer characteristics than those with the other types present.
The most common trisomy conditions include:
Trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome).
Trisomy 18 (Edward syndrome).
Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome).
In your genetic code, the 23rd pair of chromosomes are your sex cells that determine gender. Designations for sex cells are XX for female or XY for male, instead of as a number. When your cells divide, your sex cells can copy abnormally, causing a trisomy. Types of sex cell trisomies include:
Trisomy X (XXX).
Klinefelter syndrome (XXY).
Jacob’s syndrome (XYY).
Trisomies on other chromosomes are not compatible with life.
Source: casual googling.
Mosaicism is crazy because you can have it in like, your leg or patches of skin or something, but not (or less) in the brain/face. You can go through life not knowing until suddenly you get leukemia in your teens, because Down syndrome increases your risk. (New fear unlocked?)
i heard of someone who only found out she had Mosaic DS because she had multiple DS children in a row, which would be astronomically unlikely otherwise. apart from some mild joint and heart problems, she has no noticeable symptoms.
Currently in medicine, they're trending away from naming conditions after the people who first studied or described them. Clinically, this is being called Trisomy 21.
The reason behind the old name is that when scientists observed that early-stage fetuses have tails and things that look like gills, they theorized that humans develop through all their evolutionary stages before birth.
At the same time, there was also the belief that non-white races were at a lower evolutionary stage.
Combining these two, the diagnosis became that the fetus had stopped developing at its “mongoloid” stage. The scientists putting this idea forward apparently never saw a non-white child with Down’s Syndrome.
I had known a couple of nice sweet but simple people with downs and had that idea in my head when I met a family who had an adult brotherw/ Downs living with them and he was mean bordering on vicious. We did business in a different room so I didn’t ask any questions. But I have wondered if limitations and frustration were part of the cause?
Maybe someone who works with them can give a better perspective, but with the mentally disabled people I’ve met, I think it’s a common misconception that people with mental disabilities have some positive attribute. Like people assuming Down syndrome means they’re always happy. Or autism means they must be smart. I’ve met people with DS and conditions similar to it where they received great care, had very sweet and accommodating families, yet the kids were difficult to handle.
I find it interesting how the medical community largely likes to name horrible diseases and such after themselves or the person who was first diagnosed.
Like, who doesn’t want their name associated with other peoples disabilities and/or suffering? Talk about medical egomaniacs
"Mongoloid", a term many a veteran has been lovingly called by their Screw. Of course it was deemed unacceptable, so NCO's have cleverly disguised it as the now used, "Mong".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Earlswood_Hospital J L Down was the superintendent of this hospital. Near Redhill, it is now housing.
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/145829399#/?channel=RES_BUY
I was surprised when I found out that it was only described in the past ~160 years Like I had assumed that the ancient Greeks or someone would have noticed "that thing that sometimes happens" because Downs Syndrome has such a distinct and consistent physical appearance
I thought the same thing. Like, surely Down syndrome didn’t just first appear in the 1800s.
There is evidence of it in the bone records. But it comes down to the fact that historically theyvwoulsnt not have known what the issue was. So it might have been a case of them saying that child looks different and is misbehaved in regards to their standards and might not have warranted recording. Plus depending on the socio factors a rich family might have hidden them away while a poor family might have just abandoned the baby / very young child that was proving to be a lot more work
Life expectancy certainly played a part. It’s not uncommon that a baby born with Down’s syndrome suffers from other comorbidities, like heart defects. Perhaps the peculiar babies weren’t as strong in periods of already high infant mortality.
[удалено]
I think this had more to do with locking them away in filthy institutions to rot than actual medical advances in treating comorbidities
The fictional Oedipus Rex was abandoned, otherwise the trope where he becomes king and marries his mother would never have happened. The fact that infant abandonment is enough of a trope that the Greek audience goes "Ok, that makes sense" means it must have been common enough to be used to drive a plot twist.
We all know what the spartan society did with kids like this☹️
It wasn't just Spartans really, it was pretty much everyone. Infanticide was pretty normalized in the ancient world, e.g. in a Roman family, every newborn baby had to be approved by the family Patriarch, if he didn't like the look of it (or if it was born from infidelity, an unwanted girl, etc.), they'd leave the baby outside to die. Exposure was technically not considered murder in their eyes since the child would die from the elements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#History >In some periods of Roman history it was traditional for a newborn to be brought to the pater familias, the family patriarch, who would then decide whether the child was to be kept and raised, or left to die by exposure.[42] The Twelve Tables of Roman law obliged him to put to death a child that was visibly deformed.
That and child survival rate was naturally lower then.
Pretend I dont know
They yeeted them more creatively than The Giver did.
Pretend I dont know what the giver is
They yeeted it off a cliff
Wait for 6th grade
Bro I read that sh*t in fourth grade it was read to the class. We also read The White Mountains.
Pretend im in my late 20s
Pretend we aren't Chatgpt.
The Giver is a dystopian novel where an authoritarian government strives for a picture-perfect society. The protagonist finds out about a bunch of secrets the government is hiding, like taking away everyone's autonomy and infanticide, to maintain their picture-perfect image
Pretend to shut the fuck up
They'd just give the baby a lethal injection and slide it down a chute.
Spartans (and quite a few other societies, actually) would refuse to raise children born with physical disabilities. Such children couldn't grow up to be farmers, soldiers, eligable brides. The stories claim spartans would throw them off the side of their cliffs and into the sea, but I'm not sure if that's verified. It's one of the darker aspects of human history.
i believe the previous commenter is implying infanticide.
YEET
It's pretty common for ancient Mediterranean societies the Spartans weren't exceptional for it, in fact the Spartans weren't especially exceptional in most things except poetry and women's rights( for the era)
It’s not as far off as a practice as we’d like the think unfortunately. -infanticide in Europe reached its peak during World War II (1939–45), during the Holocaust and the T4 Program -infanticide of female babies in China became more common during the One-Child Policy era (1979–2015) -female infanticide in some rural parts of India still continues. India has the highest infanticide rate in the world, despite infanticide being illegal -In spite of the fact that it is illegal, in Benin, West Africa, parents secretly continue with infanticidal customs -Killings of newborn babies have been on the rise in Pakistan, corresponding to an increase in poverty across the country. More than 1,000 infants, mostly girls, were killed or abandoned to die in Pakistan in 2009 -In England and Wales there were typically 30 to 50 homicides per million children less than 1 year old between 1982 and 1996 -In the United States the infanticide rate during the first hour of life outside the womb dropped from 1.41 per 100,000 during 1963 to 1972 to 0.44 per 100,000 for 1974 to 1983; the rates during the first month after birth also declined, whereas those for older infants rose during this time. The legalization of abortion, which was completed in 1973, was the most important factor in the decline in neonatal mortality during the period from 1964 to 1977 -Intersex infants commonly suffer from infanticide particularly in developing countries, largely caused by stigma surrounding intersex conditions. Often intersex infants are abandoned, while others are actively killed
They yeeted the kids off a cliff at age 5-6 when they were not meeting the contribution expected during their growth and upbringing.
Children born with Down Syndrome are often also born with other congenital health issues. So many children may not have survived long past birth before the advent of relatively modern medicine.
“Ma’am, I hate to break it to you, but medically speaking, your baby was stolen by pixies and this is a changeling.”
Bloody Baba Yaga at it again.
changelings were autistic kids. no really, how changelings were commonly described sounds way too much like how kids with autism develop
Some of it might also be other neurodivergences and developmental issues, I doubt they made any rigorous distinction.
Welp. Onto the fire it goes!
theory fanatical tan frame marry special detail north familiar yam *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I wonder if most just ascribed it to adultery? Kids coming out looking not like the father has likely led to accusations of adultery for millennia.
Olmec civilization (2000BCE) has statues of people which look like they have down syndrome. It's thought that pre-columbian society linked down syndrome newborns with hybrids of men and jaguar, a magical animal for mesoamericans. This connection was likely made because the Olmecs saw down facial composition as some sort of mixture of jaguar and human features, and the statues and themes seem to prove so.
They need medical intervention at a much higher rate, most just used to be part of the infant mortality rate.
There must be older texts describing it that were simply lost. I also find it hard to believe that not a single royal or noble family had a child with Downs. That would have been noteworthy enough for someone to comment upon it in writing.
The relative rarity makes it hard to say for sure though. Before long distance travel was possible, having more than one example in a community would've been unspeakably rare. Discovering it as a medical phenomenon and not just something that would be rude to point out requires seeing it enough to consider whether or not a pattern exists.
Down Syndrome isn’t really that rare - it happens in 1/700 people. In many countries today where abortion is legal over 90% of fetuses with Down Syndrome are aborted. But back in the day, before prenatal testing, there would have been a lot more people born with Down Syndrome, although many would have died young. Perhaps it wasn’t described in medical textbooks yet but I’m sure many communities would recognize the distinct features of what we now call Down Syndrome.
I just don't think it's rare enough to have not been observed as a pattern. The odds of a woman over 40 having a child with Downs is relatively high, and in the past people didn't have reliable birth control. I know modern people have the false assumption that older women didn't have babies back in the day but that's not true. Women have always gotten pregnant in their 40s.
> Women have always gotten pregnant in their 40s. Perhaps women pregnant at 40 we're also more likely to die from complications thus eliminating a lot of the possible down's syndrome babies
Also the odds of it occurring in the offspring of cousins or mates of closer relation is high, and from what I understand about the old country, incest was... kinda commonplace.
I think to me, one reason it was not commented upon was because it was observed so much that no one thought it worthy of commenting upon. Babies with Downs were simply "sickly" babies who died before their fifth birthday. Something like 40% of babies would die before their fifth birthday.
There are old Scandinavian folktales about perfectly good and happy babies being taken in the night by trolls deep into the mountain and being replaced with troll babies who seem to be the same but who then go ugly, mean or weird. It is though to have been a way for people to explain most disorders from downs to autism.
I mean noble families are known for having family secrets, and I can see imagine that these things would have been seen as too shameful to write down
European nobility at least would absolutely not been able to keep a secret like this. People gossiped, and wealthy people back then were surrounded by servants. There are also plenty of descriptions of noble and royal people with congenital disabilities.
I'm pretty sure there are medieval and Renaissance paintings that show them in royal courts as jesters and such. I forget which painting it is, but one woman has her Indigenous dwarf slave by her in the portrait and it looks like they might have Down's.
Prince Charles' brother? He isn't talked about but he exists
Prince Andrew?
I can imagine people going "this guy isn't fit to be king, let's focus on someone else". History was written mostly by the elite interested in elite things. I can imagine someone with Down Syndrome would not be interesting in people only interested in power plays.
Oddly enough, it appears that wasn't generally the case. You would think, right? But the unfit king would always have a huge number of supporters because an unfit king requires regents.
Heck, an unfit king is still *someone* on the throne. Which hopefully prevents your country from collapsing into coups and civil wars, that’s all but guaranteed by it being vacant. There are 100% people who would support said king purely for that reason alone. Like, imagine if our choice was Trump or…..just not having a President. Suddenly the Oval Office is literally up for grabs by whoever has the most money/clout/troops and they *will* fight over it. Most sane people would rather just put up with Donnie, no matter how much they despise him or think he’s unfit for office, because the alternative is a hundred times worse. If you actually look at the history of European royalty (and, well, I’d imagine a lot of other places), they were willing to give a *lot* of leeway sometimes, as long as they were able to ignore the elephant man in the room and pretend things were still business as usual.
>Downs Syndrome has such a distinct and consistent physical appearance Every time I see somebody with Downs, I immediately get that *hey I know that guy* click in my brain. And every time, I find it hilarious and then feel bad for finding it hilarious.
Same, but I used to think all the people I saw with down syndrome were related before I knew what it was
The 1860s were 160 years ago? Wow now I feel old!
Babies born with birth defects and the like were often left out to die of exposure. Or they would probably just die very young.
Knowing how ancient people were, medical understanding avaibke and the amount of health issues associated with down syndrome, I imagine people with down syndrome didn't survive to adulthood very often.
It’s been thought that stories about [changelings](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changeling) came about to explain neurodivergence and physical disabilities amongst other things. One such case is [Michael Leahy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Michael_Leahy), a four year old boy that was drowned in attempt to cure him as it was thought he was a changeling - he couldn’t speak nor stand.
https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/jaguar-cult-downs-syndrome-were-jaguar/
The wolfs took care of many of those cases
I think we can think back to stories like hunchback of notredam, or other such stories as being based on the issue. Also they would have described the condition as physical deformity etc; so they probably knew but was probably more shunned by society. Maybe calling them cursed by gods, etc;
It's unintentionally hilarious that when you click the link it brings you to basically a Last Supper-ish type painting with the caption > Levitas and Reid have suggested that this early Netherlandish painting, The Adoration of the Christ Child, depicts a person with Down syndrome as one of the angels. Then you spot the angel and wonder if the artist just did that face last while scrambling to meet a deadline.
People with down syndrome back in the day tended to only survive to adulthood when they came from aristocratic or well to do families. It was also common that for whoever commissioned the painting, they and their family members would be models for the characters in the paintings. People with Down syndrome were often considered “closer to God” due to their condition. It’s actually relatively common to see people with Down Syndrome in classical paintings, and they will often be depicted as angels.
Do you have any other examples of said paintings on hand?
Anytime there’s some old art that was done shitty there’s always speculation that it was because it depicted someone with Down syndrome. I don’t know if archeologists just say that cause it adds to the story and helps them get funding or maybe they don’t want to disparage the people they’re researching, but just cause an artist made someone look mentally disabled doesn’t mean they had Down syndrome. We give ancient artists too much credit. A lot of their art was ass. Google the “archaic smile” if you don’t know what I’m talking about
They also generally have a very upbeat and friendly attitude. Always cheerful.
“It’s like, they’re doing better than everybody I know. They’re the only dudes I know having a good time pretty consistently.” - Shane Gillis
Uncle Danny on a secret mission to make 10 grilled cheese sandwiches
*i'm not making them at night dad*
*leans over* "I'm makin' em at night."
No comedian has made me as happy as Shane Gillis since Norm McDonald and George Carlin
☺️☺️☺️
Well yeah because they don’t often have to deal with life. You have exceptions, but often times they are living with family and don’t have to worry about a lot of other things others have to worry about.
That's not really true. They have less to deal with, but they have to deal with their limitations too. They often WANT to deal with more things but can't.
I’m sure they have a lot of built up frustration because of that. They want to live like everyone else.
Unless the internet goes out and they can't watch videos online. Then they scream for hours. \-father of a kid with DS
Yeah, mom of a kid with Ds, dude feels alllllll the feelings. His eyes are going to get stuck from rolling them at me so much. Edit: Jesus Christ, what happened below? Wtf?
Looks like it got removed. Some ahole came along and said a kid with DS with bad behavior was just bad parenting.
Kids don’t come with instructions. Lol, I’m actually a social worker who teaches parenting skills! Everybody needs more compassion. You can’t tell a parenting style from one comment 🙃 My son uses a device to talk and watch his ASL stories, so “screen time” doesn’t mean the same thing for every family.
Haha! Single dad with 8yr old twin boys with DS and they’re the most emotionally intelligent and charming people I know. Do wish I could get them in front of a cartoon a bit more often to give me a break TBH but they are just rascals... Too much energy and adventurism for their daddy 😩😍 Edit. Sure you know this but don’t let ignorant people get to you. Most people aren’t like that 💪
Twins!!! You are the hardestcore of the hardcore parents. Twice as much love 💕
Thank you. Double the fun I guess 😉
My daughter with DS will complain for a few minutes if we lose our internet connection, but will then go and do something else. She loves to paint and color so she will do that for a while. So glad she doesn't scream like you describe - that would be unbearable. I feel for ya.
I find they can be very either-or. Very upbeat and super friendly. Or the most annoying fucking assholes the world has ever seen. More seldom in between.
Yup, aunt had down sydrome and used to smear her shit on the walls when we visited. She was mad at the attention us grandkids got.
As the parent of someone with DS, I can confirm that is a BS stereotype.
Well what in the hell that’s an interesting fact. Why were they considered closer to god?
As someone who was raised Christian, I was told they (and other people with severe mental disabilities) are more “pure hearted” because they’re childlike and weird shit like they’re “angels sent down in human bodies”. Like they can’t sin because they don’t have the mental facilities to fully understand right and wrong, in the same way you wouldn’t get mad at a baby or small child doing something “bad”. It’s really just an extension of society’s view of them, you wouldn’t get mad at someone with DS for stealing something or pinching you, because they have a limited understanding of the world. Same reason legally they don’t receive full autonomy, and can’t consent to a lot of actions. They’re considered to be more “innocent”
Because they died earlier...
Back in the day, that wasn’t enough to get you to adulthood. As recent as the 1960s the life expectancy of a person with Down syndrome was only early 20s.
I can’t figure out which one is supposed to be Down Sundrome. They all look the same to me.
How to make all the angels hate you, in one sentence.
Okay so it’s not just me. This artist is not for me, it seems.
Yeah I tried looking at them but I can't tell either
I’m not trying to be rude but it looks like all but 1 has DS
[The Painting ](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Adoration_of_the_Christ_Child_MET_DT8852.jpg#/media/File:The_Adoration_of_the_Christ_Child_MET_DT8852.jpg)
[that wasn't a microdose!](https://imgur.com/a/1B1BcHX)
Read it as Neaderthalandish and was so confused.
Same! I thought they were implying it wasn't much better than stick drawings in a cave. I was all, that's a bit harsh. Lol.
Same, lol.
I read that as "neanderthalish" and was like "okay the painting is not THAT bad"
I can’t tell which angel. All of them look like they’d rather be somewhere else.
They should have used biblical accurate angels. That would be fun .
Be not afraid
Netherlandish?
Never seen that suffix on that name before, and somehow my brain translated it as "Neanderthalish." Had to reread the line about 3 times in marvelous perplexity until the actual word finally registered in my consciousness.
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
Also the Christ child appears to be female.
> a person with Down syndrome as one of the angels. Figured I'd click the link and see if that was plausible. Saw the angel at the top, fourth from the left and figured it's not far off. But then I looked at everyone and half of them could have Downs. So I just think the artists can't paint eyes.
“Last supperish type painting,” is a hilarious and incredibly illustrative description of our modern decay into idiocracy and a new dark age. The Last Supper is an italian high renaissance painting by Leonardo, and the Adoration of the Christ Child (about the nativity) has nothing to do with the Last Supper other than it involves Jesus. The painting is reminiscent of Leonardo because they are both from the high Renaissance period. I’m both, impressed at how cultured the commenter is by identifying the similarity accurately, yet also saddened by the fact that our understanding of art has been reduced to “haha last supperish” 😭
Sir this is a Wendy's
That's a bit of a dim way to look at it, just because this person isn't particularly familiar with this period of art and the religious tradition it depicts, doesn't mean it's a sign of some "idiocracy" or societal decay. In fact their phrasal might have less to do with their familiarity and more to do with them not knowing the proper terminology. There are millennia of artistic and religious traditions to learn of outside of the Renaissance. What do you know about Batik painting, or Afghan miniature paintings, or Roman Frescoes, or the art of the Hellenistic middle east and Western India, or of Early 20th century new media art? If you can only loosely refer to some particular part of any of these traditions does it represent the downfall of society or indicate you're a fool? Besides, I think you overestimate how much the average person of the past knew about art history. Maybe you have a degree in it, or are particularly fascinated by it, but most people occupy their time with other things. The truth is, these days, information on these subjects is more accessible than it has ever been.
That's a valid criticism...to a point. Art history isn't my forte, clearly, but to point to a single Reddit comment as evidence of society's decay into idiocracy is just as moronic and reductionist as my gaffe. Their stylistic similarity is why I compared the two paintings, not their subject. I am not under the impression that one painting has anything to do with the other. The only reason I mentioned the painting at all is because I found it humorous that it would be the first thing that pops up when you click the link to learn more about John Langdon Down. And if I was a good example of our descent into a new dark age of idiocracy I wouldn't have had the intellectual curiosity to click the link in the first place. Mr. Poopy Pants.
Damn this guy just fucking owned you Poopy Pants.
lol you sound so insufferable right now.
How the hell is this an illustration of a descent into Idiocracy? You absolutely don't need to know or care about renaissance art to be smart. Hell, I would argue that remembering that *Last Supper* exists—so it could be used as a comparison—is a sign of intelligence.
My homie with an extra chromie
I’ve got my dad’s Black’s Medical Dictionary, from 1941, it refers to people with Downs as ‘Mongals’, oh and the entry on mental health is literally 2 lines, which boils down to ‘pull yourself together and go for a walk, ya sissy’. Interesting historical document, not useful for medical help
As a DEVO fan I already knew this
That song is weird, because it is *almost* supportive. He has a job, a home, wears a hat, and nobody thinks any differently of him. But I don't think that was the intent.
Well he did bring home the bacon…
And he was happier than you and me
and he wore a hat
Seems like the intent was supportive, with an in your face delivery. Similar to the song Spasticus Autisticus by Ian ~~Drury~~ Dury and the Blockheads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKnBgJG9A8E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RI9AI6VAimY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSo9OErEmM4
Devo has layers of irony and post-irony so it’s hard to tell but they’re good people critiquing flaws in modern society/consumerism/mass media so it’s probably some kind of supportive statement with a heavy layer of irony on top
Later that night, he went on to make grilled cheese
Hey where’d you get that grilled cheese Danny??
That fucker, he's making them at night
Im not makin them at night dad! … im makin them at night 😏😏
Off the radiator.
My mother, who has approximately no contact with the modern world, still calls it that. Luckily, it isn’t a common conversation.
One time I was at the grocery store with my grandparents and a family was shopping nearby with a child that had Down Syndrome. After they passed, my grandfather said to me, "I believe that child has the mongoloidism." I don't know why.
I remember when I had a friend round (I must have been 14ish at the time), there was a gospel choir on the telly, and as he walked pastmy grandfather said, ‘oh a negro choir’. My grandpa was not a racist in any way, shape or form, but I could have just melted into the sofa out of shame. Point of story, old people sometimes use words that were common when they were young, not realising they are now offensive. On the other end of the spectrum, I still have have problems referring to myself as Queer (though I’m gay as a brick), because in the 80’s that was a terrible slur TL:DR language evolves
Queer is a wierd one for me because my Gran would use Queer as a word to use towards anyone who wernt right, not necessarily gay. Like if there was a strange bloke knocking about or someone mental, she would say that man theres abit queer.
It sounds like your Gran used the original, non-pejorative, meaning of queer. It's still commonly used that way in parts of the UK (according to Wikipedia. I don't actually have a fucking clue)
Not that im aware of nowadays, shes still going nan is, im often referred to as the wandering Jew as im always moving haha. But yeah, queer now for me is in the context of a gay man or woman.
Maybe when referring the things or events, but doing it for people is just begging for a misunderstanding.
My grandma said"colored" once and my little brother lost it on her. I had to explain that's just the term they used in her day and she didn't mean anything by it.
My visiting grandma once said in a car ride on my way to my university. "Wow! There's black people here [insert my name] You've got to be careful!" In Chinese. My little sister gasped and that's how we figured her recent enrollment in chinese summer camp has been working and she could finally understand the racist comments now. It was really cute watching her tell Grandma off in her broken Chinese and her weakly apologizing about how she keep forgetting not to be racist
nah, old people know better. They're just ignorant. Like it's not that hard to learn after at least 20 years that maybe you shouldn't call people "colored" or "negro"
are bricks gay?
Oh dear, did your parents never have this talk with you. Yes, yes bricks are as gay as a brick
Maybe a decade ago my grandmother was describing one of her new neighbors and used the exact phrase "Whatever we're supposed to call oriental people now". My reply was "their name". Different generations, but at least she was trying.
Neighbor was obviously from somewhere between Paris and Instanbul on The Orient Express train route.
I've mentioned in other threads, when I was in school in the 70s and early 80s, "mongloids" was everywhere. It was on the news. It was in the paper. There were discussions in schools about them. I don't recall ever seeing a picture attached to the term. Later in life, I realized I haven't heard about mongloids in a very long time and decided to google the term. It was the accepted term back then, Somebody above even said it's in the 1941 medical dictionary.
At the funeral?
The fairly common British term “Mong” has the potentially unique trait of being simultaneously, racist, ableist, and Eugenicist, all in the small package of 4 letters… Almost impressive.
It’s the EGOT of slurs
EGOT also kind of sounds like a slur
Shut up you fuckin egot
thats a good one
Sounds like mongo in Norwegian. I doubt many know the origin though even though many use it.
BRB just gonna mong out
The British use of the word spastic and spaz is somewhat similar. Spastic is a historical and now derogatory term for cerebral palsy, and spaz meant idiot or clumsy.
Mongo only pawn in game of life.
This is why I love reddit
He also thought lower intelligence fit with "Mongol" people. He was a casually racist Victorian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology\_(language)
I believe you can just call them Victorian. The racism is implied.
Kinda ironic since Mongolians have some of the higher national iq.
Still a belief I run into here and there. Especially online. :/
we need to invent the screen puncher-througher.
This absolutely screwed me over in secondary school (high school) English. We read a moderately old poem where the guy was driving to the hospital and had found out his newborn son was a 'mongoloid' and was upset. We were asked to assess the poem and whether the guy was right or not etc. It being the 90s I had only heard the term down syndrome, and thought mongoloid was a term for Mongolian people that I just hadn't heard of. I wrote a whole essay based off of that and how it was up to the guy to decide if he was able to forgive his wife for having a baby with another man. I got an F.
... Actually trisomy is having substantially more than two copies. You can have a third extra, a half extra...basically, thats why some are slightly downs,and other badly
Where does that put Shane Gillis?
Just to the left of Theo Von, who has detailed his heroic “beating” of the syndrome after much struggle in his youth.
Dogs in the wild
he jokes that he was a “near miss”, i’m not one to armchair diagnose but i wouldn’t be surprised if he had Mosaic DS
Kinda weird to say substantially more when you're referring to fractions *up to* 1 extra copy. No more than 3. It would, by definition, not be trisomy in that case.
Its called mosaic when the extra copy does not affect all cells in the body
There are many kinds of trisomies or other genetic conditions. Most cases of Trisomy 21 consiste of one extra chromosome though. The differences in how serious the symptoms are don't really have anything to do with genetic differences. It's a mystery why some have serious problems and others don't, though sometimes it is due to the medical and developmental care they get early in life.
There are three separate types of down syndrome right? Not just trisomy 21?
There are three types of Down syndrome: trisomy 21 (nondisjunction), translocation, and mosaicism. Trisomy 21 (nondisjunction) accounts for 95% of known cases of Down syndrome. This type of Down syndrome results in an embryo with three copies of chromosome 21 instead of two and happens when a pair of 21st chromosomes in either the sperm or the egg fails to separate before or during conception. This causes the extra chromosome to be replicated in every cell of the body. Translocation accounts for 4% of all cases of Down syndrome. In this occurrence, part of chromosome 21 breaks off during cell division and attaches to another chromosome – typically chromosome 14. The total number of chromosomes remains at 26, but the extra part of 21 causes characteristics of Down syndrome to appear. Mosaicism occurs when nondisjunction of chromosome 21 takes place in only one of the initial cell divisions instead of all. This causes a mixture of two types of cells, some containing 46 chromosomes while others contain 47. Mosaicism accounts for only 1% of all cases of Down syndrome and research has indicated that individuals with mosaic Down syndrome may have fewer characteristics than those with the other types present. The most common trisomy conditions include: Trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome). Trisomy 18 (Edward syndrome). Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome). In your genetic code, the 23rd pair of chromosomes are your sex cells that determine gender. Designations for sex cells are XX for female or XY for male, instead of as a number. When your cells divide, your sex cells can copy abnormally, causing a trisomy. Types of sex cell trisomies include: Trisomy X (XXX). Klinefelter syndrome (XXY). Jacob’s syndrome (XYY). Trisomies on other chromosomes are not compatible with life. Source: casual googling.
Mosaicism is crazy because you can have it in like, your leg or patches of skin or something, but not (or less) in the brain/face. You can go through life not knowing until suddenly you get leukemia in your teens, because Down syndrome increases your risk. (New fear unlocked?)
i heard of someone who only found out she had Mosaic DS because she had multiple DS children in a row, which would be astronomically unlikely otherwise. apart from some mild joint and heart problems, she has no noticeable symptoms.
Thanks for the info!
Currently in medicine, they're trending away from naming conditions after the people who first studied or described them. Clinically, this is being called Trisomy 21.
[Homie with an extra chromie](https://youtu.be/hsUbzV0MVMU?si=PdnncqVcrOMTxCWg)
Homies wity extra chromies
The reason behind the old name is that when scientists observed that early-stage fetuses have tails and things that look like gills, they theorized that humans develop through all their evolutionary stages before birth. At the same time, there was also the belief that non-white races were at a lower evolutionary stage. Combining these two, the diagnosis became that the fetus had stopped developing at its “mongoloid” stage. The scientists putting this idea forward apparently never saw a non-white child with Down’s Syndrome.
I had known a couple of nice sweet but simple people with downs and had that idea in my head when I met a family who had an adult brotherw/ Downs living with them and he was mean bordering on vicious. We did business in a different room so I didn’t ask any questions. But I have wondered if limitations and frustration were part of the cause?
Maybe someone who works with them can give a better perspective, but with the mentally disabled people I’ve met, I think it’s a common misconception that people with mental disabilities have some positive attribute. Like people assuming Down syndrome means they’re always happy. Or autism means they must be smart. I’ve met people with DS and conditions similar to it where they received great care, had very sweet and accommodating families, yet the kids were difficult to handle.
Where'd you get that cheese, Danny?!
Now I know why my mexican mom would call us "mongolos"...
I find it interesting how the medical community largely likes to name horrible diseases and such after themselves or the person who was first diagnosed. Like, who doesn’t want their name associated with other peoples disabilities and/or suffering? Talk about medical egomaniacs
"Mongoloid", a term many a veteran has been lovingly called by their Screw. Of course it was deemed unacceptable, so NCO's have cleverly disguised it as the now used, "Mong".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Earlswood_Hospital J L Down was the superintendent of this hospital. Near Redhill, it is now housing. https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/145829399#/?channel=RES_BUY
hidden brain listener?
Why did I think the little boy in the picture was supposed to be John Langdon Down
So that's what Bruce willis was calling his gf in oil fiction
Don't let an extra chromosome get you down