When the perfect woman is genetically male

lovelyxorchid:

An interesting article on CAIS

Interesting, but quite limited and elementary in its scope I feel. Not to mention the tried and true reliance on AIS (and general gendered) stereotypes. Reminds me a lot of the “House, MD” episode featuring a CAIS patient (minus the incest and rape stuff - yay sensationalist medical dramas!).

In particular:

• XY ≠ “genetically male.” I get that most people’s understanding of biological sex is limited to this basic conception (XX = female, XY = male), but if you’re going to write an article about a medical variation in sex development, perhaps it would be useful to explain that this is not quite the case - there are a number of steps that go into making any genetic person “male” or “female.” Perhaps if she said “chromosomally male” or something…but still, I just hate the deterministic idea that despite EVERYTHING ELSE - just because I have XY chromosomes, I am “genetically male.” If anything, I’m genetically intersex. Because every piece of my DNA, while having XY chromosomes, also is what makes every cell in my body [mostly] unable to process the very hormone that makes people male!


• Most AIS women DO NOT require surgical expansion of their vaginas! This is an absolutely terrible myth. FIRST OF ALL, this is based on the assumption that in order to live a ‘normal’ female life, one must be able to fully accommodate a man’s penis.  But even beyond that, surgery is generally agreed upon to be a LAST RESORT ONLY (let alone the VAST variation in degrees of success with surgery). Manual dilation is very effective for most AIS women. Who is it that’s deciding what is “required” for AIS women anyway? For most of modern medical history, it’s been the patriarchal medical establishment. That is why so many intersex people have had such “required” (and often ineffective!) surgeries as minors, and without even giving their consent!


• CAIS is also intersex. I don’t know why the author chooses to insert the term intersex (which she then quickly and conveniently defines as the archaic “hermaphrodite”) only when describing PAIS. Perhaps PAIS individuals are more apparently intersex at birth, but intersex isn’t only when the doctor can’t fill in the “It’s a ____” blank…


• The stereotype of AIS women as models is so tired, IMHO. Yes, women with AIS tend to be taller than average XX women. Yes, not being able to process androgens prevents pubic/underarm hair and acne. But that’s pretty much where the image ends, at least in my experience. Most of the AIS women I’ve met are not more or less curvy, they are rather diverse. Of course, I have met some who fit the model standards (and in fact know one who was all over the Paris and Milan runways this season), but using this as the image for all AIS women is damaging to those who, for example, aren’t a size 2.


• And finally, more than anything else, my biggest issue with this piece is the idea that a “perfect” woman is so because she has physical traits that tend to attract straight males (who, of course, have been so wonderfully conditioned by our “perfect” culture). Why are the things that make a woman “perfect” ONLY physical? While having “flawless and dewy skin, angular cheekbones, a cinched waist, milkmaid breasts, long legs, dove-like hands, and lush long hair” is nice, perhaps something could be said about what’s happening between her two ears? Besides the fact (as stated above) that more AIS women do not fit this stereotype than do, the point is, society shouldn’t be interested in this condition because the women who have it may look like Barbie dolls! Maybe we should be interested in it w/r/t to the implications it presents about gender AS A WHOLE. Just a thought.