DSD: Fascism North American medical and manufacturing Consent by Curtis E. Hinkle
One of the most important issues concerning the controversy raised by replacing the term "intersex" in English by the term DSD (disorder of sexual development) is very simple. What do we need to change your name? Another question comes immediately to mind: what good is it to have a catch-all diagnosis that purports to focus all sexual variations?. Is this necessary and if so, why? Other important questions: Who are the people who recommended this change and why? Is it us?
The Organisation Intersex International deplores this arbitrary and unnecessary of wanting to replace the word "intersex." The only intersexed person who recommended this change in terminology was Cheryl Chase the founder of ISNA, Intersex Society of North America. The most important section in favor of this change was in an American medical journal: the Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism, co-authored in 2005 by Alice Dreger, a non-intersexed, her husband, Aron Sousa, who is a pediatrician, and Cheryl Chase.
"Changing the Nomenclature / Taxonomy for Intersex: A Scientific and Clinical Rationale", Alice Dreger et al, Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism, 18. (729-733 (2005).
http://www.medhelp.org/ais/PDFs/Dreger-Nomenclature-2005.pdf
In this article, the authors propose to replace "hermaphrodite" and the five categories in the sexual result - female, male, true hermaphrodite, pseudo-hermaphrodite male and female pseudo-hermaphrodite - the term "disorders of sex development" or disorders of sexual development because they believe it works best in a medical context. The great fault of the authors' analysis of this paper is the fact that we never calls into question the assumption that intersexuality is a condition that requires an accurate diagnosis. The whole article is based on the assumption that sexual variations are indeed pathological and requiring medical treatment. However, the authors offer no evidence of such an assertion and this erroneous assumption confuses and obscures all the arguments in the article. Since our bodies are not so different from the bodies of others and if one really wants to improve health care for intersex people, these authors why did they not seen fit to write a study on diseases that affect us more than others? Common sense would dictate that we treat the diseases in question and not the gender of those involved. The authors do the opposite in this article because they are trying to highlight is that sexual variation is in itself a disease. According to them, it is she who must be treated and they conclude that it would be preferable that each intersexed person can receive a diagnosis based on the etiology of his "disorder" ("disorder"). (1)
For years Alice Dreger and Cheryl Chase supported the idea that intersexuality was a biological variation, not a pathological condition. on ISNA's website says: "Intersex is a socially constructed category that reflects real biological variation." (2) If so, it is also clear that the shape and size of the nose are also a biological variation of the same size and shape of the clitoris. If you wish to change the size and shape of her nose, one is free to make that decision. Treatments are available and there are surgeons who do these operations. There is no group I know who wants to invent a catch-all diagnosis which includes all changes 'abnormal' noses that they become a new medical condition to justify the treatment and surgery on the nose of children without their consent. Parents are turning to cosmetic surgery and can make the nose of their child if they can convince doctors that without this operation their child suffer and not be good about yourself. could be argued that the shape and size of the nose may be more stigmatizing than the size and shape of the genitalia because we usually come out openly.
Despite the good intentions of the authors of this paper, intersex is still considered a "medical emergency" and this article gives the impression that we are facing another urgent socio-medical: the need for a new term that is a more precise genetic point of view and to improve medical treatments. But should we not already questioning the idea that intersexuality itself that requires treatment?
Dreger's article promotes the use of outdated medical terminology in English since the 1950s "the disorders of sexual differentiation" (later "sexual development") - by using the technique of the straw man in his arguments. She had announced on its website and on the website of ISNA (which it has controlled for years) its intention to eliminate the term "hermaphrodite" but never admit it was in fact the term "intersex" she wanted rid the pretext that this term is not a precise medical terms.
In conclusion, we suggest the language of 'hermaphroditism' and 'pseudo-hermaphroditism' be abandoned. One possible alternative . . . is to use instead . . . the umbrella term "disorders of sexual differentiation". Such an approach would have the salutary effects of improving patient and physician understanding and reducing the biases that are inherent in the use of the current language of 'hermaphroditism'. - Dreger et al.
Pour conclure, nous suggérons que les termes 'hermaphroditisme' et 'pseudo-hermaphroditisme' soient abandonnés. Une alternative possible... on pourrait employer au lieu de cela... le terme fourre-tout "les désordres de différentiation sexual. "Such an approach would have a salutary effect and patient and physician and reduce bias inherent in using the current terminology of 'hermaphroditism'. - Dreger et al.
This outdated medical terminology was adopted in 2003 by the federal agency of the United States on genetic defects (NICHD) and one of their offices studying behavior "perverted" and "abnormal", "The Network on Psychosexual differentiation "(the network on issues of psychosexual differentiation). Before that it was Johns Hopkins University who defended the same traumatic experiences of Dr. John Money, and which supported his theory of gender identity (the theory that continues to justify the assignment of sex without consent child) who suggested this new terminology. These two institutions have funded and hired Alice Dreger who became the director of the Consortium on the DSD.
are known for years that Johns Hopkins is doing everything to avoid lawsuits from victims, outraged by fraudulent scientific experiments of John Money (experiences that were reported by Dr. Milton Diamond). (3) For this Medical University, the use of a new term is an emergency because it could help to justify all these experiments performed without the consent of children. It is also interesting to learn that Alice Dreger is one of the editors of their publications. (4) It becomes obvious that this intersex activist, which is itself not intersexed, faces a conflict of interest.
Do we really need a new name for the variations in sex? There are many intersex people who will say no and they feel perfectly comfortable with the two categories "female" or "male". For many of us, the word "intersex" in English was a key factor for our development staff and our own struggle for human rights. Just some people who believe that their intersexuality is a disease, there is no intersex activist who advocates for the imposition of this term. Instead . If anyone intersex may consult a doctor to get treatment (like any other person also because diseases are not specific), it is misguided to impose a catch-all diagnosis for all persons including intersex those who find their intersex is a natural variation. But this sad state of affairs is explained if one realizes that this is the result of reflections and calculations of non-intersex people. It is people like Dreger (not intersexed), some doctors and parents who are in favor of this change in terminology, which pose a serious and alarming consequences on the protocols and treatment of intersex people, especially concerning children. We must hold them accountable for their actions and to react to end the humiliation and pathologizing.
Notes:
1. Page 733. "Changing the Nomenclature / Taxonomy for Intersex: A Scientific and Clinical Rationale", Alice Dreger et al, Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism, 18. (729-733 (2005).
2. What is intersex? (What is intersex is that?) http://www.isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex
3. The story of John / Joan was known to the public by an article by John Colapinto in "The Rolling Stones," published December 11, 1997. It was entitled "The True Story of John / Joan." Here is an excerpt from the last page of this article:
"[...] His story has shaken to the foundations of the edifice built on the theories of John Money in the 50s. He highlighted a central weakness in a theory that has persisted during most the 20th century. It is Freud who first said that the harmonious development of a child as a boy or girl as essentially depended on the presence or absence of penis - a notion central to Money's theory sexual development. It is for this reason that John Thiessen has been transformed into a woman. It is a concept that today is also challenged by research in neurobiology. They have led scientists to believe that, as Dr. Reiner puts it, 'the most important sexual organ is not the genitals, the brain [...] "
4. According to the official website of medical journal Perspectives in Biology and Medicine , the two editors of the publication of the John Hopkins University Press are Alan N. Schechter and Alice D. Dreger.
http://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/perspectives_in_biology_and_medicine/editorial.html
