Wait, We Forgot About Intersex People Again
You’ll very often here people say that there are only two sexes. This is a model which is taught to people from an early age and all over the world - as people grow up, as they study biology, as they talk in public - however; it misses some critical information which is often left unconsidered. Intersex people exist. Ref. GF2NUSZJNR
Intersex conditions are one of many things which can result in a vast variation on the human form and experience - more. Ignoring this, leads to a fundamentally broken understanding of how people really are in day-to-day life. Ref. S58I7B5TID
if(typeof sex === 'undefined') {
// TODO: implement this...
}People may debate whether or not there are two sexes or more, and yet, this often comes down to a difference in the way we choose to categorise information, not a difference in understanding about the world.
Knowing that intersex people exist:
- Do we choose to say there are two sexes, and that intersex is something “other” altogether?
- Do we choose to say there are three sexes, of which intersex is one?
The latter approach is generally more inclusive and better describes the real, lived experience that many people share. On top of this, there are genuine concerns about the implications of forgetting the existence of intersex people, particularly if those definitions are written into policy or law, for example.
By writing intersex people out of policy and the presentation of fact, their views and experiences are often minimised. Being intersex carries it’s own nuanced experience for every individual, and people deserve to feel safe, protected and heard.
Regardless, the existence of intersex people challenges the binary model for sex, and raises questions for some about how we should view this topic moving forward.
Often, there is no reason to test for intersex or sexual development conditions (DSDs) until differences arise. As a result, many people may be unaware that they are intersex and even appear, continue to live, feel and develop thinking they are a sex which is technically different to their genetic makeup.
This, at it’s core, drives home the importance of letting people live as they feel most comfortable - no matter what we expect of our biology, it’s ultimately our understanding of ourselves which effects the way which we live as people. That would be the case for any human, not just those that are trans or intersex.
Depending on the dataset used, it’s expected that around 2% of the population is intersex.
How Is Sex Defined
The Problem With Defining Sex, And How Appearance Plays It’s Part
This is mentioned here because it highlights a key feature about the way human being and our research works - the way we categorise the world, be that regarding plants, animals, planets, molecules - anything, is ultimately derived from our observation. We can categorise such things because we can measurably see differences in them.
People will have been categorised as either male of female based simply on looks throughout history. While most of the time that’s correct, it’s not a true representation of how reality is.
For one thing, if you look at any given organism with a sufficient level of scrutiny, you may find all kinds of things that don’t align with a general view of what’s “typical” - additional sex organs, sex organs of different shapes, sex organs typically associated with both males and females in the same body, or looking deeper again: differences in the way a person’s body develops across time despite appearing no different at the start, or deeper again: the very structure of a person’s DNA showing chromosomal variations well outside of the norm.
The problem here, is that in order to define sex, we are taking a vast number of observations about an organism’s characteristics and attempting to boil it down into two or three categories. That inherently means a lot of information is being lost in the process, making it impossible to create a model befitting of every case it is applied to.
That is to say that while appearances are how we identify and categorise many things, when looking in a sufficient level of detail, many organisms - and, by extension, people - don’t fit into categories as simple as male and female.
Gametes
Taking a slightly deeper look at biological sex - gametes are a common focus. Gametes are the reproductive cells which a given organism creates. The simplest definition of biological sex - often considered the closest nature comes to a true binary - is based on gamete size: males produce small gametes (sperm), and females produce comparatively large ones (ovum, or eggs). While this framework functions well in many cases, it doesn’t capture all variations on biological form.
Some organisms - including humans, in rare instances - can produce both types of gametes at the same time, while others produce none at all.
Context matters, and it’s important to consider a broader range of biological traits beyond reproductive function when describing sex in living organisms. Many people who are technically classed as intersex, can still produce gametes typically in line with males, females or in rare cases, both.
Chromosomes
Another approach is to directly examine the sex chromosomes a person is born with. If we look at it purely from this angle, there are still complications. There are six variations (known as “karyotypes”) including the two which most people consider to be typical. These are:
- XX
- XY
- X
- XXY
- XYY
- XXXY
Does this mean there are 6 sexes then? No. Despite there being 6 relatively common chromosomal variations, people carrying them would still typically be described as male, female, or intersex.
Perhaps even more confusingly, not everyone who possesses the one of the non-standard sex gene karyotypes is classed as intersex - Ref. WOSKWOHDRW. It is entirely possible to possess some of those gene variations and develop no symptoms at all, meaning that yet again, chromosomal variations alone are not a suitable way to determine sex, but rather that a person has to consider the broader context, taking factors like physical attributes, sexual development or potential symptoms into account as well.
Bi-Modal Distribution
You may have come across the idea of a bi-modal distribution being used for defining sex. If you have, then you may be familiar with a chart which looks something like this:
At it’s core the idea is that because there are so many complexities in the way sex presents itself, we should choose to define it not as a single, immutable trait, but as a collection of it’s related characteristics.
Based on human knowledge surrounding chromosomal variation, gamete production and sexual development that might make some sense. Again, this still has some problems:
Notice the bottom axis of the graph is labelled as “Morphological trait”. The chart could be used to display variances in sexual development based on a very specific physical feature, for example: “shoe size” or “breast size”. Problems arise when using this chart to examine the definition of sex itself, because while it is possible to choose to examine a very specific trait or list of traits that are typically associated with sexual development, it’s not clear how it serves as a definition of sex. In simple terms: there is no way to define which precise blend of traits makes a person “the most male” or “the most female”.
To that end, while the bi-modal distribution cannot serve as a definition of sex, it serves an important role in effectively displaying differences in sexual development, based on any given selected trait.
In Summary
Each model for determining sex is nothing more than that: a model. It is a logical way that we as humans have chosen to categorise information. The inherent complexity of nature itself means that there is no single model which can function correctly in every single case, but rather that proper evaluation of the context is needed in order for a person to select a model which is a helpful to what they’re aiming to represent.
Generally speaking, intersex conditions will each be described by their characteristic traits, and this may come down to a mixture of anatomical structure, chromosomal variation or associated symptoms.
Key Points
- Constructing a model which can work in every situation, 100% of the time is not possible due to the complex nature of biology.
- Sex is a non binary trait within any model which is sufficiently complex.
- Chromosomal variation is not a foolproof indicator to a person’s sex.
- A bimodal distribution may be used to display differences of sexual development based on highly specific morphological traits, but falls short in other areas.
See: Conditions Affecting Sex Characteristics for further reading.