People tend to think of human sexuality as a very black and white issue, particularly within the heat of the American Culture War. Straight or gay, right or wrong, good and evil seem to dominate the conversation, and the idea that one chooses their sexuality, or can change it simply by willing it to be so, is a prevalent and misguided perspective. “Man bits fit with lady bits, and lady bits fit with man bits” is the mantra (or something similar), and anything else is an abomination according to ancient texts, written in dead languages, by Bronze Age men. The problem with that perspective, however, is that it attempts to simplify an extremely complex issue, and demonizes anyone that doesn’t fall into the range of what the religious right deems morally acceptable.
One of the reasons I think it is so easy for some to judge others based on their sexual orientation is because sexuality cannot be seen. Not that you couldn’t “see” two people having same-sex intercourse, but what I mean to say is that a person’s sexual desires are an internal mental state, and not something visible you can determine just by looking at someone. Because mental activity is generally viewed in terms of “choosing,” this makes it very easy for a person to look at someone’s physical characteristics (i.e. male/female), and then determine what their appropriate mental attitude should be regarding those of the same or opposite gender. This is usually a pretty comfortable place for those who like to keep sexuality a black or white issue, but things get a little murky and confusing for them when you introduce them to a category they are likely unfamiliar with: intersex.
“Intersex, in humans and other animals, is the presence of intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish female from male. This is usually understood to be congenital, involving chromosomal, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies, such as diversion from typical XX-female or XY-male presentations, e.g., sex reversal (XY-female, XX-male), genital ambiguity, or sex developmental differences. An intersex individual may have biological characteristics of both the male and the female sexes.”
With the introduction of intersex individuals, things become much more difficult to explain from the perspective of religious texts. What does the Bible or the Koran say about someone who has a vagina and a penis? Or a vagina and testicles? Or a penis and ovaries? Or ovaries and testicles? Can they go either way? Can they only have sex with other intersex individuals? If a person with a vagina and testicles has sex with someone with a penis and ovaries, is that a homosexual relationship, or do the opposites cancel each other out? Perhaps the best course of action is to let the 109,000+ born each year love and have sex with whomever they want, because it’s their body, and they know better than anyone who they are, and no one has the right to tell them otherwise.
Now let’s take a step back for a moment because if you thought sexuality was all neat and tidy before, I have a hunch you’re at least willing to admit that maybe it’s not as tidy as you thought it was. Is it not reasonable to acknowledge that if external sexual characteristics cannot be chosen, such as with the cases of intersex individuals — that the internal sexual characteristics of those in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community are also not chosen? Is it also not reasonable to acknowledge that because we see intersex specimens among other species in the animal kingdom, as well as homosexual and bisexual behavior among other animals, that this behavior would be expected in certain percentages of humans as well?
I’ll leave you with part 1 of this excellent documentary on intersex individuals. If you have not seen it previously, I highly recommend that you watch it, no matter what side of the fence you happen to be on concerning human sexuality. If nothing else, you’ll come out a little more informed about a little-known issue than you were before.
Awesome! Everyone should be allowed to remain as they are at birth. Lots of women in the “crunchy moms” group also advocate ending male genital mutilation (circumcision), another little talked about issue that is usually religiously driven or Just to make the little boy look like daddy. I have known about genetic sexual ambiguity for quite some time being a biology major (almost chem minor), and had several genetics courses as well. It actually made me want to have Chloe tested, because I know what they look like on the outside might not be how they feel. I just want to pre-empt a mistake on the parenting side of the issue, if possible.
I’ve thought about writing on the issue of circumcision as well, but haven’t gotten around to it yet. There are actually men who use a weighted system to “re-grow” their foreskin, but I think I’ll just live with things as they are now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin_restoration
Reblogged this on Gideon Jagged.
One academic estimate of the number of intersex individuals is about 0.018% of people.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224490209552139
So it’s not an issue for most people, if only 2 out of 100000 will not fit at all in the gender stereotypes.
That’s about the same number of people who are missing an arm. No one goes blogging about the complexity of the human upper body shape.
http://www.aboutonehandtyping.com/statistics.html
These things are only issues for people if there’s enough of them to make a major impact on society.
Do you by chance have the full research paper? Have you actually read it? Directing me to a link where I can purchase the article of a minority position for $36 isn’t exactly my idea of a rebuttal.
“That’s about the same number of people who are missing an arm… These things are only issues for people if there’s enough of them to make a major impact on society.”
So piss on all the war veterans who come back amputees, because there isn’t enough of them to worry about right? It’s easy for you to dismiss a minority group when you are in the majority.
I think the key words in your above comment are “One academic estimate.” Again, this is a minority position, and without actually seeing the paper and the criteria Sax used, I really cannot comment on his position other than to say that he is in the minority in his position.
I think you’re getting lost in the numbers. My argument doesn’t require a large number of intersex people to prove my point — it only requires 1.
The difference between ‘religious’ sexuality and ‘evolutionary’ sexuality is stark.
The religious model has everyone following a very narrow path based on the personal preferences of some particularly ignorant bronze age sheep herders.
The evolutionary model has everything doing whatever they like as long as the birth rate exceeds the death rate by a sufficient margin — and some creatures do some very strange things indeed, as Olivia Judson’s book, “Dr Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation” makes hilariously clear.