Beyond the Queer Alphabet by Malinda
 Smith
 and 
Fatima 
Jaffer
 - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

6

Disorders of  Sex Development: De-Queering the ‘I’ in LGBTQI2-S

Catherine Clune-Taylor, University of  Alberta

In  1993,  activist  Cheryl  Chase  founded  the  Intersex  Society  of  North  America  (ISNA61),  kick- starting  what  would  come  to  be  known  as  the  intersex  rights  movement.  Since  then,  the  word ‘intersex’ has become more controversial, more contested and more divisive than ever before. First used in 1917 by biologist Richard Goldschmidt to refer to those conditions that gave rise to atypical sex anatomy – or what was generally referred to as ‘hermaphroditism’ – the word intersex was never officially adopted or consistently used by physicians, and only gained mainstream recognition after being  reclaimed  in  the  1990s  by  activists  seeking  to  dispel  the  stigma  associated  with  these conditions and the vague, demeaning and often sensationalist term ‘hermaphrodite.’ As with many of  the  terms  lumped  under  the  ever-widening  LGBTQI2-S  [lesbian,  gay,  bisexual,  transgendered queer intersex 2-Spirited) umbrella, ‘intersex’ has always been at the centre of  heated debate.

Which conditions counted as ‘intersex’ conditions? Must a condition give rise to ambiguous genitalia or genitalia deemed to require surgical correction for it to be an intersex condition? What then of those individuals whose genitals looked ’normal,’ but were at odds with other components of  their sex anatomy (such as their chromosomes, gonads or reproductive organs)? Did they have intersex conditions?  Or  what  about  those  conditions  that  might  give  rise  to  genitalia  deemed  to  require surgical  correction,  but  who  had  ‘normal’  hormone  exposure  in  utero  and  otherwise  typical  sex anatomy? Were they intersex conditions? And beyond all of  this, what did it even mean to claim that one was intersex? Was there even such a thing as an ‘intersex’ identity and if  there was, was it a queer identity? Did the ‘I’ really belong in LGBTQI2-S?

These many years later, not only do all of  these questions remain, but a new, much larger question overshadows them: Should we even use the term intersex at all? Many, including the former Intersex Society of  North America61  (now the Accord Alliance62), would rather we not.

Like many other intersex activist groups that popped up around the world during the 1990s, ISNA drew its early energy and rhetoric from social and political movements for women’s rights, gay rights and civil rights as well as from queer and feminist academic challenges to biological determinism, sexism and medical authority. Many of  these groups engaged in a two-pronged critique. On the one hand, they took on contemporary medical practice: holding protests at medical conferences as they called  into  question  the  necessity  and  timing  of  genital  surgeries,  the  presumed  naturalness  of physical  sex  dimorphism;  the  heterosexism  underlying  treatment  recommendations  and  outcome analyses;  and  defending  the  dignity  of  those  with  atypical  sex  anatomy.  On  the  other  hand,  they 61  Intersex Society of  North America. (2008). Our Mission. Retrieved from http://www.isna.org/ engaged  in  a  larger  social  and  political  project,  making  visible  the  existence  and  experiences  of intersex individuals through videos such as Is it A Boy or a Girl?63  and Hermaphrodites Speak!64

As with many activist organizations, ISNA’s strategies changed with time. Many members became increasingly convinced that the best way to improve the lives of  individuals with intersex conditions was  through  the  creation  of  better  medical  models  of  treatment,  something  they  felt  was  best achieved through collaboration with physicians rather than through a more confrontational activism. Also,  they  reasoned,  it  might  be  best  to  escape  the  negative  stereotypes,  the  increasingly  messy identity politics, and the association with queerness that had come to haunt the term intersex and shift focus to the concrete medical needs of individuals with these conditions.

Many  affected  individuals  and  their  parents  found  the  term  intersex  offensive,  arguing  that  it sexualized individuals with these conditions, and falsely implied they have no clear gender identity, or have a queer identity that they do not claim for themselves. Besides, they said, it was misleading to assert there was such a thing as a intersex identity or community, for while there are many online communities of  individuals with intersex, there are no brick and mortar communities of  those with intersex conditions living together – and those who do belong to these virtual communities tend to come together fairly infrequently and primarily for meetings about political consciousness-raising.

In 2003 ISNA created the Disorder of  Sex Development Consortium,65   a medical advisory board chaired by feminist thinker and historian of  science Alice Dreger to begin the work of  advocating for the adoption of  the diagnostic label “Disorder of  Sex Development” (DSD) and collaborating with physicians to create a new patient-centered model of  care. It also began the work of  distancing itself  from the term ‘intersex’ and its own more overtly political past. In 2006, due in large part to the  work  of   individuals  associated  with  the  ISNA/Accord  Alliance,  the  Pediatric  Endocrine Associations   of   the   United   States   and   Europe   published   their   “Consensus   Statement   on Management of  Intersex Disorders”66  in the journal Paediatrics  – a special article announcing both a new patient-centered treatment model for intersex conditions (one in which biology or biological factors would gain a new centrality in determining optimal sex assignment) and the adoption of  the term  ‘disorder  of  sex  development.’  And  in  2008,  the  Intersex  Society  of  North  America  quietly dissolved and re-formed as the Accord Alliance,67  a group which identifies its mission as working to “promote comprehensive and integrated approaches to care that enhance the health and well-being of  people and families affected by DSD by fostering collaboration among all stakeholders,” which they identify as “patients, parents and clinicians.”

Reaction to the recent changes in the direction of  ISNA/Accord Alliance and the clinical treatment model for intersex conditions has been mixed, with much of  the debate focused on the adoption of the label “disorder of  sex development.” While this new terminology has pleased many physicians, patients, parents and even some academics, many are angered by the adoption of  the pathologizing language  of   ‘disorder.’  Some  have  argued  for  alternative  diagnostic  terms  that  carry  a  less stigmatizing,   less   correction-demanding   tone,   such   as   “variations   of   sex   development”   or “divergence of  sex development.” Others simply refuse to give up the word intersex.

In  the  introduction  to  her  2009  edited  collection,  sociologist  Morgan  Holmes  acknowledges  the taboo  she  is  breaking  titling  her  collection  Critical  Intersex68   in  the  era  of  DSD.  She  writes,  “this collection   asserts   that   we   (whether   we   are   scholars,   intersexed   persons,   activists   or   some combination of  these three) are not yet done with ‘intersex,’ even as we seek to turn a critical gaze on ‘intersex.’ The implicit imperative in the title of  this collection is that it is too soon to accept the language  of  disorder  wholesale  and  that,  in  fact,  a  critical  value  remains  in  the  use,  deployment, recognition and interrogation of  intersex.” And if  the plethora of  online support and activist groups explicitly asserting their resistance to DSD are any indication, there are indeed many people who are not yet done with ‘intersex.’

Why are so many unwilling to give up the label intersex? For some, identifying as intersex means identifying as having had certain experiences as a result of  having a body deemed  non typical for a male  or  a  female  –  experiences  which,  for  better  or  worse,  have  influenced  the  way  they  see themselves and shaped  their experience of  their lives. For others, identifying as intersex is a political statement,  signifying  a  critical  position  towards  the  presumption  that  intersex  conditions  are necessarily pathological and in need of  ‘fixing.’ For others still, identifying as intersex is a way of laying  claim  to  a  queerness  that  has  come  to  be  associated  with  the  term  that  DSD  proponents would rather disavow.   And while I do agree with proponents of  the DSD nomenclature that we harm people when we impose upon them an identity they do not claim for themselves, I also think we harm them when we fail to recognize as legitimate or real the identities they do claim.

Furthermore,  the  fact  that  the  move  from  intersex  to  DSD  is  partially  driven  by  the  desire  to reassure others – in particular, parents – that those with intersex conditions are heteronormatively gendered  should  be  cause  for  great  concern.  It  is  true  that  many  children  born  with  intersex conditions will be ‘normal’ boys and girls and grow up to be ‘normal’ men and women. But some will not. Some will identify as intersex, both in spite of  and because of  all the messy identity politics and queerness it entails. Some children born with intersex conditions will even come to identify as trans, as queer, as lesbian, as gay and so on, just as some of all children are wont to do. Should we really be trying to reassure anyone of  the heterosexuality or the gender normativity of  others – be they parents of  children with intersex conditions, parents of  children without intersex conditions or anyone else? If  we really hope for things to “get better,”69  perhaps we need to consider the value we give  to  being  normatively  gendered  and  heterosexual  when  we  assert  that  it  is  something  others want, need and deserve to be reassured about.

63  Intersex Society of  North America. (2008). Is it a Boy or a Girl? (Discovery Channel). Retrieved from http:// www.isna.org/videos/boy_or_girl

64  Intersex Society of  North America. (2008).Hermaphrodites Speak!. Retrieved from http://www.isna.org/videos/ hermaphrodites_speak

65  Accord Alliance. (2012). DSD Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.dsdguidelines.org/about/consortium

66  Lee, P.A., Houk, C.P, Ahmed, F.& Hughes, L.A. (2006). Consensus Statement of  Management of  Intersex Disorders. Pediatrics 118(2). Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/2/e488.full

68  Holmes, Morgan (Ed.). 2009. Critical Intersex. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company.

69  It Gets Better Project. (2011). What is the It Gets Better Project?. Retrieved from http://www.itgetsbetter.org/pages/ about-it-gets-better-project/