One of the commenters to my blog on Caster Semenya commented that I should not have used the term hermaphrodite–despite the fact that this was the term used in several newspapers of various stripes–and should have used the term intersex. Needless to say, as with any discussion that involves sex and gender nowadays, this is another of those areas where there is some massive argumentation going on. One side puts intersex conditions as part of a spectrum of human possibilities that include gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders, heterosexuals, etc. They, of course, minimize any arguments that speak about curable medical conditions or try to argue that any surgical solutions are either some type of brutal misuse of medicine or that this means that gender change surgery must be allowed for all who claim to be transsexual. The other side sometimes tends to simplistic answers that fail to take in the existence of people with medically identifiable manifestations who also need answers as to how to live their lives.
And, so, sadly it breaks down into the argument of many years. On one side, at one extreme, are those who argue that anything that is must somehow be what God wanted. Taken to enough of an extreme, and one gets obese people in danger of their personal health arguing that they should be accepted as is and not asked to change. [Note: it is true that mere obesity should not entail job discrimination, etc., unless the obesity makes the person unable to perform the job. But, this is an actual argument found today among some obese people, that their physician should not ask them to change their medically dangerous habits.] Medically that does not make sense. A physician is correct when s/he insists that the person must change. At the other extreme are those who try to push the witness of Scripture and Holy Tradition to mean that only fertile couples that intend to have children should be allowed to marry. Another commenter provided a good sound answer on the post to that particular extreme while upholding traditional orthodoxy. [In passing, up until the 20th century, annulments were granted by various bishops on the grounds that the woman was unable to conceive, so it was not that long ago that lack of fertility was sometimes sufficient to annul a marriage. That, of course, was not good Holy Tradition.]
OK, according to one set of definitions, what are the various intersex conditions?
| Name | Karyotype | Genitals | Gonads | Secondary Sex Characteristics | Gender Identity | Prevalence (global) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I have a REAL problem with your definition of Turner Syndrome Secondary Sexual Characteristics as ‘partially female, partially androgynous.’ TS women have NO androgynous sexual characteristics. ALL organs, internal and external (with the possible exception of some mosaics who have 45x/46xy karyotype) are FEMALE–and ALL of them exist. TS women do not produce estrogen/progesterone SIMPLY because the ovaries are not capable of doing so– just like the ovaries of post-menopausal women. Many mosaic TS women develop all secondary sexual characteristics spontaneously, and simply go into POF. Others experience it even earlier and need the addition of the hormones the body is no longer capable of producing (kind of like those with Hashimoto’s need thyroid hormone to provide THAT particular hormone, which the body is no longer capable of producing). There’s nothing androgynous about TS women.
Carole, I will take your word for it. I copied the chart from what I thought was a reliable listing. But, I will admit to limited medical knowledge in this particular area. My area of medical knowledge is in immunohematology. Thank you for helping me to understand Turner’s a little better.