Peter Dinklage has Achondroplasia. While Verne Troyer has a much rarer condition known as Cartilage–hair hypoplasia. I'm just basing this off wikipedia, but /u/vernetroyer is also a pretty active redditor, if he wanted to chime in.
/u/vernetroyer won me over with his shark costume, and quickly found himself one of the few celebs I actually care to pay attention to. Yes, active redditor and a good contributor to the site.
Dinklages accent is weird in the context of psuedo-English accents but is very consistent. I could see it believably being a mild speech impediment on the characters' part.
Huuuuge differences. One of the biggest is in whether your trunk is of average/near average size and your extremities are shortened (achondroplasia) or if you trunk is dwarfed with longer arms/legs (my weirdly rare but dominant form of dwarfism) Also whether your skull and spine are involved. Note that these all are types of dwarfism that involve skeletal proportions that are "not normal".
If the dwarfism is caused by hormonal issues, you will get a person with no skeletal problems, just tiny.
There are...over two hundred forms of dwarfism :)
we are..legion!
So... If a person has achondroplasia, is it plausible that you could cut off their arms and legs and replace them with bionics and they'd be a relatively normal size? Assuming skull and spine are not involved.
I feel like you know enough about dwarfism that i should ask you this question.
I suppose men with dwarfism are affected... you know... at all zones of their bodies. (I truly don't know how to formulate this without possibly offending someone or google this without fear of something finding this somehow in my search history).
Haven't you read A Song of Ice and Fire? Between the legs, Tyrion is made no differently than any other man.
No, but seriously, most dwarfism is caused by a genetic mutation that only affects the skeleton. Anything not made of cartilage or bone is not affected.
A three inch man with a six inch dong would look a bit disproportionate, yes.
But my point was that since it affects skeletal structure, the penis size would be the same (for most forms of dwarfism) as average size men. Whether it looks bigger on them makes no difference to the size in and of itself.
I think my father is average sized there, even though he is mayyyyyybe 4'9". I've heard jokes about Acon (acondroplastic) men being "tripods" so....take that as you will I guess!
Yes there are there just fewer crazy little women a la Little Man lol when I went to little people get togethers (many moons ago) there were often more girls than guys. I don't have specific numbers for you though. It is possible that some of the recessive types favor one gender.
5'7" is not dwarfism. You can have that condition, but if you're over 4'10" after puberty, you're not a dwarf. Hell, you'd be a tall girl and only a couple inches under average height male. I'm sure it sucks being short, but you're not that short.
Jeez 5'7 isn't freakishly short and I'm assuming you're a straight guy and as a 5'7 girl I am considered on the taller side and I'd say about 80% of women I see are shorter than me by like 2 inches at least. I'm skeptical because how the heck could that be considered "dwarf" by any standards? They're just being mean, if you're being serious.
Just a random question for you since you said dwarfism. How do most people who have dwarfism feel about the phrase "little people"? My understanding is that is the politically correct nomenclature. But, as someone with no skin in the game, that seems like a really clunky way to describe yourself.
Is that really what most people with dwarfism want to be called or is that like the vocal minority pushing that?
Honestly I can see why people might not want to be called dwarves, as it may conjure images of folk creatures. But why did midget go out of style? To me it seems to have no connotations aside from stature.
So I know you probably have to answer these questions all the time. I don't mean malice or to annoy, but I figure it's not something I can understand from a Google search.
I can't remotely claim to speak for most people with dwarfism, and yes, "little person" is supposedly the preferred phrase, but a friend of mine with dwarfism absolutely hates this term.
He's a guy in his 30s... I would imagine that many adult men might not like the idea of "little" anything being part of a label for them. The way he sees it is that he has a medical condition, and he'd rather it be called by its appropriate medical term: dwarfism. Other people view it less medically and more as a part of their core identity, and I suppose that's why they prefer "little people".
It seems an odd thing to nitpick, but all the stuff I'm reading on dwarfism is very insistent that the correct plural form is 'dwarfs'.
Apparently 'dwarves' was a very uncommon variant until Tolkien got his books out there, and is pretty much always properly used when speaking about the fantasy creatures.
They also say that when speaking of relative size, 'f's are in order, i.e., "The elephant dwarfs it's greatest fear, the common field mouse."
I believe that "midget" just means you're scaled down, whereas dwarfism encompasses a large subset of atypical proportions. Although, to be completely honest, I have no particular knowledge on the subject, so get a second opinion.
It did used to be used in that context, but only ever saw common usage, never in any medical field. It's basically impossible to separate 'midget' from where it was born, being used by the Middle Class in the early 19th century to equate people with more aesthetically pleasing forms of dwarfism with children, and circuses and sideshows.
280
u/Indy12 Jul 13 '15
Nope, I'm a guy. I've got morquio syndrome though, not that people tend to differentiate a ton between dwarfisms.