As Promised: Gender Part II
Last week we took the position that the argument against homosexuality based upon its “unnaturalness” is a flawed one. We listed a number of species that have been observed performing homosexual acts in nature: the Black Swan, Amazon Dolphin and even the American Bison to name a few. Furthermore, we explored the notion that the concept of gender identity is so subjective one can hardly criticize what lies outside the “norm” with any validity. We also said we would discuss transgender/intersex/transsexual issues in further detail. This week, in further recognition of this week’s Pride events, we give you just that.
The scope of understanding that surrounds transsexuality is so muddled, that even giving it a definite name is a formidable task. Here are some of Merriam-Webster’s interpretations of mixed gender:
- Transgender: Having personal characteristics (as transsexuality or transvestism) that transcend traditional gender boundaries and corresponding sexual norms.
- Transsexual: A person who strongly identifies with the opposite sex and may seek to live as a member of this sex especially by undergoing surgery and hormone therapy to obtain the necessary physical appearance (as by changing the external sex organs).
- Intersexual: Existing between sexes.
Given the wide array of nuances within this gender classification, and the difficulty defining each individual notion, it may be easy to misinterpret or misunderstand your fellow human. Tolerance begins with understanding, and people’s understanding of gender can vary from culture to culture. We must keep an open mind as such.
Again, we reiterate that gender is a social construct. Remember Disney-Pixar’s “Finding Nemo?” The protagonist clownfish of the story were hardly represented with their true identity in nature. What Disney-Pixar failed to tell you is that clownfish are all transsexuals (although the actual definition implies medical alteration), and that they are quite possibly one of the clearest indicators of gender functioning as a social construct—in a very literal way.
Housed within a host anemone, clownfish maintain a social hierarchy for survival. At the top of the hierarchy is the breeding female, and beneath her is the breeding male. Beneath the breeding couple are a number of basically genderless non-breeders. When the matriarch of the clownfish clan dies, the next in line to fill her position is the breeding male. When this happens, the breeding male will physically undergo a natural sex change and take over as the breeding female. From there, the highest ranked non-breeder of the clan will become the new breeding male. This ongoing alteration of gender is a natural part of clownfish society.
While this perpetual ebb and flow of gender is an evolutionary adaptation for clownfish, it may not be entirely applicable to humankind. Can we say the same for humans? It’s quite possible that those born with unclear gender are the next step in an evolutionary function we have yet to comprehend. It’s equally plausible that it is simply a mutation, an anomaly, or a fluke. Then again, plenty of scientists theorize that adaptation is catalyzed by random mutation. There are a lot of questions that surround intersex births, but perhaps the most important one is how should doctors approach it?
A Psychosocial Emergency?
An article in Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics titled “Intersex(es) and Informed Consent: How Physicians’ Rhetoric Constrains Choice,” describes the ethical quandaries doctors encounter with such births.
Writer J. David Hester, in his article’s abstract, explains, “When a child is born with ambiguous genitalia it is declared a psychosocial emergency, and the policy first proposed by John Money (Johns Hopkins University) and adapted by the American Academy of Pediatrics (and more broadly accepted in Canada, the U.K.,and Europe) requires determination of underlying condition(s), selection of gender, surgical intervention, and a commitment by all parties to accept the ‘real sex’ of the patient, all no later than 18–24 months, preferably earlier.”
On the Intersex Society of North America’s website, you can find a list of frequencies for various types of intersex categories ranging from 1 in 770 births (Hypospadias—“a urethral opening between corona and tip of glans penis”) to 1 in 130,000 births (partial androgen insensitivity syndrome). Those who undergo surgery “to ‘normalize’ their genital appearance” are estimated at 1-2 in 1,000 births.
Some of the biggest dilemmas surrounding how we medically approach intersex births are implied consent, deciding on a gender, avoiding surgical complications and a number of others. But perhaps most pertinent is whether or not we should be surgically intervening at all.
Let’s say you were born of questionable gender. Like Hester said, the doctors declare a “psychosocial emergency,” and they must intervene. With good intention, American medicine deems surgical intervention necessary to help you avoid social alienation. What happens when a physician picks the wrong sex?
An X/Y chromosome test does not account for all the idiosyncrasies of gender, especially in these situations. While physicians will attest to a number of appreciative patients, there are still plenty of patients who are quite unsatisfied. They often face the same alienation and confusion that the doctors were trying to inhibit. Not only that, but they’ve been robbed of their natural genitals and their ability for pleasure: their true nature, so to speak.
According to Hester, “The presumptions, judgments, values, and presuppositions brought by the physician to the identification, diagnosis, and curative procedures create a network of constraints that exclude alternative possibilities. The result is a situation wherein parents, physicians, and intersexed patients have ‘no choice’ but to accept the medical treatment guidelines.”
Intersex births are only the tip of the iceberg. The issues that intersex-born individuals live with, and the issues surrounding those trying to understand them, differ greatly from those who undergo medical sex alterations in adulthood. This faction of gender classification is a discussion unto itself. Once again, as we are limited on space, we will have to discuss that in a future editorial.
The most important question one should ask him or herself when attempting to define gender is, “Why does it really matter?” As a nation we’ve come so far in terms of tolerance and understanding, be it race, religion, creed or color.
The answer might lie in what psychologists call “chunking,” which is the human brain’s innate modus operandi to try and classify our surroundings in succinct categories. While “chunking” may be advantageous for calculating complex computations, it contributes to our subconscious biases. The best we can do as individuals is to try and fight the urge to sum up what cannot be summed up.
“Sex is ubiquitous…. Yet sex remains a mystery to researchers, to say nothing of the rest of the population. Why sex? At first blush, its disadvantages seem to outweigh its benefits. After all, a parent that reproduces sexually gives only one-half its genes to its offspring, whereas an organism that reproduces by dividing passes on all its genes. Sex also takes much longer and requires more energy than simple division. Why did a process so blatantly unprofitable to its earliest practitioners become so widespread?”—from Julie Schecter’s “How Did Sex Come About?” article in Bioscience.
- Members only features
- Members can email articles, add articles as favorites, add tags to articles and more. Register now to unlock additional features.
