Against Sex and Gender Dualism in Gender-Specific Medicine

In this paper, we aim to criticise the dualistic approach of gender-specific medicine with regard to sex and gender. Firstly, we analyse the definition of intersexuality and reject the idea that it is a disease unto itself. Medicine classifies cases of intersexuality as disorders of sex development, because they do not conform to the dualist scheme that defines an individual\u2019s sex as \u201ceither male or female\u201d. However, we argue that there is no compelling reason to label intersexuality as a disease unto itself. In order to support this claim, we then consider some relevant naturalistic conceptions of health and disease. Secondly, we show that gender-specific medicine, and medicine in general, could be improved by abandoning rigid dualism concerning sex and gender. Taking sex and gender pluralism seriously would potentiate us to recognise that intersexual, transsexual, and transgender people have their own specific physiology, pathophysiology, and health concerns, which up to now have been mostly overlooked and unaddressed by gender-specific medicine. It would also encourage us to consider intersexual, transsexual, and transgender people, and to include them in clinical trials, medical research, and treatment. All this would be an ethical, epistemological, and medical improvement

The Taxonomy and Ontology of Sexual Difference: Implications for Sport

When it comes to sexing the body, the effect of increasing knowledge has not been to consolidate the two-sex model of sexual difference, but to challenge the certainties of binary thinking. While this has consequences across all discourses, sport finds itself in a particularly bright spotlight because of its reliance on a clear distinction between male and female bodies. This article argues that sex testing is not based on knowledge of reality, but on an edifice of gender ideology that is simplistic and out-dated. It proposes that, in the light of recent controversies, there is now an urgent requirement to take the growing challenges to the taxonomy and ontology of sexual difference seriously. This should be done through a pro-active programme of education, targeted at all those concerned with sport, so that they can think differently rather than attempt to bolster the status quo