you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Lyssa 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am aware that gametes are the deciding factor for biologists. However, if somebody has the chromosomes, external genitalia and socialization of the opposing sex it strikes me as both oversimplistic to say "disordered male, nothing more to it". Your own link includes the following statement: "In humans, this sexual dimorphism is so consistent that 99.98% of births are unambiguously male or female." So biologists do recognise - exceedingly rare - disambiguations within the binary system. That is not the same as to (incorrectly) state that sex is a spectrum.

Are you generally opposed to the definition/labelling of certain rare conditions as "intersex"? And if Semenya would not be winning womens' medals but just be somebody observed female at birth, raised as a girl and suddenly developing male characteristics at puberty (probably a distressing experience) would you call her "him" after you'd heard that internal testicals have been found? Should that not be her/his own right to decide?

[–]Realwoman 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, it's her or his right to decide although it looks like s/he was aware of the her condition from a young age, it's apparently more common where she lives.

I'm not opposed to the intersex label, but from I understand, it's not a scientific or medical term. Each condition is unique. Semenya's condition maker her or him a male for sure. But if we're talking about complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, for example, I think calling those people women is justified.