Technically, even while many deplore the term "midgets" as an inappropriate term for "little people", some still preserve the former distinction that a "midget" is a little person who has small stature but a normally proportioned frame. At the time of the filming of the WIZARD OF OZ, there were many "true midgets" little people in the U.S. as well as little people who were small because of "dwarfism". Today, "true midgets" are rare in the U.S. because medical science uses growth hormones to help them grow to more conventional adult sizes. Little people with dwarfism factors continue to usually have proportionality problems because it is not as "simple" as providing additional growth hormones.
I've seen interviews with surviving "midgets" of the WIZARD OF OZ cast who (1) proudly described themselves as "midgets" and corrected anyone who confused them with "dwarfs" -- and emphasized the differences in that midgets are proportional in the sizes of major portion parts while dwarfs are not. (2) They also claimed that there was some "friction" and conflict between the two types of little people on the WIZARD OF OZ. Some claimed that conflict between the two types of little person was even more severe in other contexts around the country in the years which followed. Any explanation of those tensions I would leave for the people involved to explain. But I can see that the two groups have some difficulties in common but others that are quiet different. (For example, many little people have severe pain and disability issues because of disproportionate growth complications. Midgets are much less likely to have such.) (3) Modern science has made midgets far less common in the U.S. than several decades ago.
So, my main point has been that your question is rather confusing because of the terminology you chose (and some may say that they are offended by the term.)
reply
share