EVENT 5: INTERSEX: BEYOND THE BINARY

This was a very different event compared to the others I have attended this quarter. This event was not about art and neither was it about the intersection of art and technology. However, it follows a similar theme, which is the intersection of two contrasting fields. In this case the discussion is focused on the intersex, and how both the social and medicinal worlds play a role in their life. I found this to be a very important event primarily because I found myself terribly under informed about intersex. Although I attribute this partially to my own ignorance but there is also the fact that knowledge regarding intersex is not that common, and there is a need to address this issue.

Proof of attendance

This event was organized by EPIDAPO, an organization that focuses on the new field of epigenetics, which is the study of changes in organisms due to modification in gene expression. The representative from EPIDAPO, started the discussion by talking about the clinical terminology used to refer to intersex individuals, which is DSD (Disorders of sex development). They talked about how the word “disorder” has negative connotations, and cause of pathologization of the condition. They followed this by raising the key issue of medical normalization. This usually involves surgeries to assign a gender to the individual along with hormonal treatment. Their speech ended with raising some very probing questions: Should there be an attempt at medical normalization? How to care for the intersex? What does caring even entail when related to the intersex?

The first lecturer was Ellen Feder from American University, Washington. She is a professor of Philosophy and Social Policy, and she presented her take on the care of intersex in the current society. Her presentation was very interesting because it was based around the concept of curiosity in the medical field. She started by discussing the topic of Intersex Management, which is the basic procedures and advice given by medical professionals to manage with being intersex. The psychologist John Money wrote the standard procedure for this management. Money made normalization of intersex the standard procedure, as he strongly believed in the binary division of sex: male and female. In order to confirm to these genders, it was important to undergo medical procedure. Professionals in the medical industry are now realizing that this is far from a solution and actually creates a lot more problems. Patients tend to undergo extreme trauma, either from remember too much of the excruciatingly painful process, or being stuck in a web of secrecy where their owen condition is hid from them.

Money was the main figure in this speech, as he seemed to have two sides. The one side being that he was very compassionate towards people of this condition and always treated them without any judgment. However, the other side was a problem. Out of his need to become a pioneer in his field, he lost the initial curiosity that caused him to study intersex. He became obsessed with the idea of two genders, and stifled any curiosity about gender being more fluid than that. Feder’s speech used Money as an example to show the need for medical curiosity, but also to show the cautionary tale of the result of lack of curiosity. She pointed out that as of now, medical curiosity about the proper care, long term effects and accompanying complications of intersex seems to be low. She urged professionals in the industry to provide more attention to this issue.

The second lecturer was Dr. Eric Vilain, an esteemed professor at UCLA. His talk was based around the implications of the name DSD, as well as a discussion on traditional views on gender and intersex along with the new challenging views on those topics. Although DSD on first glance gives us the impression that it is an oppressive term, Dr. Vilain pointed out that the term was a big stride in the right direction. Traditionally gender taxonomy was based on gonodal tissue (its presence or absence). However DSD, which is defined as a congenital condition in which the development of chromosomal, gonadal or anatomical sex is atypical, is more comprehensive. There is an active debate on whether the term DSD should stay or is intersex the more appropriate name. However there are merits to both sides. DSD term has clinical value but intersex is vague. Furthermore, intersex has a political meaning, which DSD doesn’t.

At the same time, Dr. Vilain pointed out, clinical terms seem to have an actual social impact which cannot be disregarded. Originally the word “disorders” was put in to bring doctors to the table and not be rash with their diagnosis. But at this point, now that the medical community is better informed, the word disorders needs to be removed to stop the negative connotations. He also expressed the need to stop forcing intersex individuals to confirm to the binary genders, and cultivate an open society where this identity does not need to be hidden.

I think it is important for the general public to be aware of this discussion and to be actively a part of this development. This was a very rewarding event and I highly recommend others to attend it.