While Turner and Klinefelter’s syndromes are often discussed in scholarship on intersex, the question of their inclusion or exclusion in intersex taxonomies is often discussed only in the context of the question: How many intersex people are there? In this article I go beyond this question, critically analysing the inclusion or exclusion of sex chromosome variations in historical and contemporary taxonomies of intersex/DSD. At different historical moments, these chromosome variations have been central to intersex classifications, peripheral to them, or even excluded. In this article, I focus on the history of inclusion and exclusion of Turner and Klinefelter’s syndromes within intersex classifications, to explore the consequences for classification systems and the individuals named by them. Can individuals affected by these diagnoses or classifications expect such improvements through this DSD framework and the promise of a clear genetics of intersex to come? I argue that this is very much a ‘promissory science’ ( Hedgecoe, 2004), built upon the expectation that, at some time in the future, improved genetic testing and increased genetic understandings will lead to clearer classification, quicker diagnosis and better treatments. The DSD classification was an attempt at ‘sorting things out’ ( Bowker and Star, 1999), in part through a grounding of the classification system in genetic science. The following year, the ‘Consensus statement on management of intersex disorders’ was published, in which DSDs were defined as ‘congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomical sex is atypical’ ( Hughes et al., 2006 Lee et al., 2006). In 2005, a meeting of mainly medical professionals proposed a new classification system, one that would move away from taxonomies of ‘hermaphroditism’ and the terminology of intersex, to the new term, ‘disorders of sex development’ or DSD. In general, intersex refers to the state of being born with biological sex characteristics that vary from what is typically thought of as exclusively male or female. Classifications of variations of sex characteristics, or intersex traits, have changed significantly throughout history. The classification of bodily variations is a complex, messy process. Alternative social and historical definitions of intersex – such as those proposed by the intersex activists – have the potential to do more justice to the lived experience of those affected by such classifications and their consequences. The article questions the current drive to stabilize and ‘sort out’ intersex classifications through a grounding in genetics. This article explores initial descriptions of Turner and Klinefelter’s syndromes and their subsequent inclusion in intersex classifications, which were increasingly grounded in scientific understandings of sex chromosomes that emerged in the 1950s. In addition, people both inside and outside the medical community have disagreed about what should be covered by the classification system, in particular whether sex chromosome variations and the related diagnoses of Turner and Klinefelter’s syndromes should be included. While the medical community has largely accepted the move, some individuals from intersex activist communities have condemned it. Part of the rationale for this change was to move away from associations with gender, and to increase clarity by grounding the classification system in genetics. The 2006 ‘Consensus statement on management of intersex disorders’ recommended moving to a new classification of intersex variations, framed in terms of ‘disorders of sex development’ or DSD.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |