CAIS Privilege

Although this is a topic that's been on my mind for awhile, I have never really brought up because I sense it could be highly controversial, and might even make a few of you angry.

I have been thinking about the status that women with CAIS (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) seem to have within the AIS / DSD and/or intersex "community" (if you can call it a community). As someone with CAIS, I will include myself in this category. I feel like we are the "darlings" of the medical world and the media to some extent. If you don't understand what I mean, please bear with me.

As someone with CAIS, though I am technically intersex, and neither wholly female nor male, I am much more easily accepted as female by the majority of society, by the medical community, and by some others with DSD (disorders of sex development). I fit the paradigm physically more so than many women with Partial AIS or another DSD. What's more, I happen to fit more within the paradigm of what is considered in some circles in society "conventionally" attractive for a woman. I am very feminine, and considered by many to be very attractive. I am straight. (Pretty much anyway. But that's a separate topic.) People will label me just a regular woman with a Y-chromosome. As if my karyotype and my internal testes were more of a fluke or an accident.

Women with other conditions, who were born with anatomy that doesn't so easily fit the paradigm, who might appear more masculine than the ideal feminine paradigm, or who might be attracted to just women or to both men and women - these women bear what I think is a lot more weight in the game. Society is less comfortable with them and their bodies and their identities. And to be frank, I think these women have a tougher time.

I'm not saying that women with CAIS have it easy. We've got plenty to deal with - infertility, fear of rejection by our often straight male partners, and more. Plus, the very idea that we can so easily "pass" as "typical" women, even with our clothes off creates a different type of tension: If no one ever has to know, or would know, do we tell them? Do we have an obligation to?

But many women with PAIS or other DSD never even have that choice. And from birth they are thrust into a world where an immediate surgery or other irrevocable decision might be made for them. And that's just the beginning really.

But what was the point of this post? Really just to get your feedback on this. I am so curious as to how others feel about this idea I have about "CAIS Privilege". Is it valid? Am I crazy? Do you agree or disagree?

Phillips is "Breaking Down the Myth of Two Sexes"

Following is a link to one of the better articles on AIS and intersex that I've seen. From the Vancouver Sun. (Thanks, Canada! And THANK YOU to Nicky Phillips for being open about her condition and wanting to dispel the myths and stigma against it.)

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Breaking+down+myth+sexes/2011849/story.html

Caster Semenya and the Rules of the Gender Game

If you've been watching, or reading, or listening to the news lately, it's likely you've heard of Caster Semenya - probably less for her extraordinary athletic performance in the 800-meter race and more for the controversy surrounding her gender.

The press has been mostly sensationalistic because it seems everyone loves to jump onto a story about the latest medical "oddity". Finally came across a NYTimes article today which gives a nod to the difficulties Semenya must be facing now and in the future as a result of this; in addition to considering the difficulty of defining gender itself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/22/sports/22runner.html

"Where's the rulebook?" it asks.

Androgen insensitivity syndrome is mentioned in the article. Being androgen insensitive myself, I am an example of how it's not chromosomes that can define someone's gender.

Though the sporting world probably wishes it were more clear-cut, I don't think they'll find easy answers to gender definitions anywhere -- not in the genitals, not in the pitch of one's voice or the cut of one's jaw.

The Times article makes a great point in particular with the following:

Sure, in certain sports, a woman with naturally high levels of androgens has an advantage. But is it an unfair advantage? I don’t think so. Some men naturally have higher levels of androgens than other men. Is that unfair?

Consider an analogy: Men on average are taller than women. But do we stop women from competing if a male-typical height gives them an advantage over shorter women? Can we imagine a Michele Phelps or a Patricia Ewing being told, “You’re too tall to compete as a woman?” So why would we want to tell some women, “You naturally have too high a level of androgens to compete as a woman?” There seems to be nothing wrong with this kind of natural advantage.

Sports officials have claimed the genetic tests on Semenya will take weeks due to their complexity. In my opinion, it's not the tests that will take weeks--those will take days. It's the ensuing debate over the results and figuring out what comes next which will take the real time.

Though I hate for Semenya or any individual to be placed in the spotlight amidst such controversy, on the positive side I think this whole issue is forcing a more open dialogue around a subject which continues to be taboo.

Folks who are intersex, or who just don't neatly fit our definitions of the binary male/female condition, have been around as long as human history, and it's a bit sad that we haven't wholly accepted them.