Has anyone seen the movie Conclave and would be happy to talk about the ending with me

[Philodendrine]

I looked for a thread but am not very good with the search function so if there's one already please let me know. I hope it's OK to ask this question here; I know there are some v knowledgeable posters and have followed various threads over the years and learned quite a bit.

I'm interested in whether the ending of Conclave (in particular, the new Pope's genetic make-up and appearance combination) is actually possible. My understanding from watching the film is that s/he was said to be chromosomally female (so I assume XX) but appearance had been unclear at birth, had been raised male and outward appearance is consistent with that (masculine features, low voice) but had found out in adulthood they had a uterus and ovaries.

My very limited understanding of DSDs is that if there is a voice that's broken / masculine body shape consistent with male puberty, then there must be testes of some kind (whether fully formed/descended or not) or otherwise there wouldn't be testosterone to effect those puberty type changes. So having a XX dsd and uterus/ovaries wouldn't work for that scenario I wouldn't have thought.

I read somewhere that the movie differed from the book in that the book said they had a vagina (not ovaries/uterus) - which I think could work, because an outwardly apparent 'vagina' but internal male organs and an XY DSD could still produce the outward male face/voice/body appearance. But to me the movie version doesn't seem to work. Can anyone with any better knowledge than mine tell me if I'm misunderstanding things?

I thought it was quite clear in the book that he had a DSD but was found to be natal female and had surgery to change that to male.

Crap ending to the book though - really awful given the rest of it was really compelling. I do find Robert Harris very inconsistent though.

Or Chekhov's wrapped disposable razor!

This is the relevant bit in the novel, which I read after I saw the film, so can't remember exactly what was changed in the film:
-------------------

‘And what would it have been, this treatment?’

Benítez sighed. ‘I believe the clinical terms are surgery to correct a fusion of the labia majora and minora, and a clitoropexy.’

Lomeli sat down on the nearest chair and put his head in his hands. After a few moments, he was aware of Benítez pulling up a chair next to him.

‘Let me tell you how it was, Dean,’ Benítez said softly. ‘This is the truth of it. I was born to very poor parents in the Philippines, in a place where boys are more prized than girls – a preference I fear is still the case all over the world. My deformity, if that is what we must call it, was such that it was perfectly easy and natural for me to pass as a boy. My parents believed that I was a boy. I believed that I was a boy. And because the life of the seminary is a modest one, as you know well, with an aversion to the uncovering of the body, I had no reason to suspect otherwise, and nor did anyone else. I need hardly add that all my life I have observed my vows of chastity.’

‘And you really never guessed? In sixty years?’

‘No, never. Now, of course, when I look back, I can see that my ministry as a priest, which was mainly among women who were suffering in some way, was probably an unconscious reflection of my natural state. But I had no idea of it at the time. When I was injured in the explosion in Baghdad, I went to a hospital, and only then was I fully examined by a doctor for the first time. The instant the medical facts were explained to me, naturally I was appalled. Such darkness came upon me! It seemed to me that my entire life had been lived in a state of mortal sin. I offered my resignation to the Holy Father, without giving him the reasons. He invited me to Rome to discuss it and sought to dissuade me.’

‘And did you tell him the reasons for your resignation?’

‘In the end, yes, I had to.’

Lomeli stared at him, incredulous. ‘And he thought it was acceptable for you to continue as an ordained minister?’

‘He left it up to me. We prayed together in his room for guidance. Eventually I decided to have the surgery and to leave the ministry. But the night before I was due to fly to Switzerland, I changed my mind. I am what God made me, Your Eminence. It seemed to me more of a sin to correct His handiwork than to leave my body as it was. So I cancelled my appointment and returned to Baghdad.’

‘And the Holy Father was content to allow that?’

‘One must assume so. After all, he made me a cardinal in pectore in full knowledge of who I am.’

Lomeli cried out, ‘Then he must have gone mad!’

Thank you for starting this thread - I really enjoyed the film until the end, which left me very disappointed and frustrated.

II don’t know of any DSD that results in a female not only presenting as male but believing herself to be male. - i.e. not developing breasts or having periods. CAH is the closest but as I understand it this would result in significant health difficulties that demand treatment during childhood so it would have been unlikely that the main character could have developed into a healthy adult if not diagnosed at a young age.

If it had been the other way round (male chromosomes but presenting as female) CAIS could conceivably fit the bill - but not relevant to this story.

46XY could also potentially fit the bill (with the presence of a non-functioning womb)- but here the individual is male (xy) so not really a barrier to becoming pope.

I know it’s Hollywood etc. but I’m a bit sad that DSDs are again misrepresented and seem to be a political ‘gotcha’ rather than the rare but complex health conditions that they are. There is already so much misinformation and lack of understanding about the issue (5% of the population etc.) that this feels like a cheap trick.

It seems it could be plausible.

The de la Chapelle syndrome, also known as 46,XX testicular disorder of sex development (DSD) 1], is an exceptionally rare genetic disorder that influences sexual development. Within this condition, individuals with a female karyotype (46,XX) experience undescended testes and ambiguous genitaliastemming from irregular gonadal and genitalia development during fetal gestation
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10693380/

This suggests female karyotype put male phenotype (but with low testosterone)

At puberty there are male typical changes (which would create low voice and physical signs) but can also be breast development.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214624524000200
This is an interesting case of a 35 year old described as a man with the DSD who presented with infertility. He was married and wanted children - "Given the absence of the AZF region, there was no chance of success with a testicular sperm extraction and subsequent trial of IVF, and we therefore discussed traditional adoption versus donor sperm to address the couple's infertility. They ultimately proceeded with donor sperm insemination, and at the time of this writing the couple has two healthy children."

It seems the name has been changed - it has been known as de la Chapelle or 46XX male syndrome. Following an international consensus meeting in 2005, it is now more properly known as 46,XX testicular disorder of sex development

Agree with this. And I am as Terfy as can be. I assumed it was a case of true hermaphrodism. I actually felt it was dealt with quite well.

As an aside- I really immensely enjoyed that the man who became the Pope is actually an architect in real life and a very new/amateur actor. I thought he was fantastic in it.

Interesting - although as stated extremely rare among an already rare condition - and most people with this condition require hormone treatment to develop secondary male characteristics at puberty - but I guess there are always exceptions so as you say - the storyline could be possible.

However, it also raises questions about whether sex is determined by the Y chromosome or a functioning SRY gene - but I know that’s an ongoing debate.

DSDs who are miniscule in the population are now being used as propaganda in the ongoing never ending trans propaganda war. This is Hollywood using these people for their own nefarious ends. Looks like Trump is going to crush this ideology. Good.

True hermaphroditism would be the same individual being able to produce viable sperm and viable eggs either sequentially or at the same time. And have a uterus in which they could gestate a baby, as well as having a penis, etc. I don't see how it would be possible because both sexual development pathways would have to be active and the development triggers for one sex suppress development for the other. Also, I believe, the same originally undifferentiated tissue makes the sexually differentiated structures - penises and vaginas, labia and scrotal sacs. So I don't see how there would be enough to go around, if you see what I mean! I'm in no way an expert, this is just what I've picked up.
I'll take a look at the article posted, though.

A couple of years ago, I saw a report about the case posted upthread of a female with de la Chapelle's who had externally male genitalia, testes as well. Phenotypically male. They even produced semen, but could not produce sperm and (obviously) did not produce eggs. It's probably the same case.

Well, the article was a short extract and I can't say I'm any the wiser!

These articles all refer to "true hermaphrodites". I don't know how that is defined. Given that I've heard the definition of male and female is determined by the gametes their bodies are designed to produce, how are male and female defined when the person produces neither and their phenotype displays ambiguous or mixed sex genitalia? Anyone know? Not an expert, have I misunderstood?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10693380/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4542431/#R2

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Am%20J%20Med%20Genet&title=SRY%20gene%20transferred%20to%20the%20long%20arm%20of%20the%20X%20chromosome%20in%20a%20Y-positive%20XX%20true%20hermaphrodite&volume=90&publication_year=2000&pages=25-28&pmid=10602113&doi=10.1002/(sici)1096-8628(20000103)90:1%3C25::aid-ajmg5%3E3.0.co;2-5&

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Clinical%20and%20anatomical%20spectrum%20in%20XX%20sex%20reversed%20patients&publication_year=1994&author=C.%20Boucekkine&author=J.E.%20Toublanct&author=N.%20Abbas

That was exactly my issue with short article that was posted. As far as I know, true hermaphroditism is as I described - the ability of an individual to both impregnate and gestate. I don't know how it's being defined in those studies.

I think True Hermaphroditism was replaced with ovotesticular syndrome or ovotestis around 2006 onwards because the initial label was misleading.

Ok, thanks. Yes, it is misleading.

Two of the articles above are more recent, so someone didn't tell the authors!

As always, these case studies of extremely rare people with DSDs are interesting but not really explanatory of the magic people want to make use of in fiction! The case linked above has, like many with that DSD, a Müllerian duct remnant, but that's not by any stretch of the imagination a uterus, which the film character was said to have. IANAMD but in basic developmental what-connects-to-what terms, testes, even undescended ones, plus a uterus, seems to me likely to be an impossible combination. No testes implies it's not plausible to have normal male levels of testosterone - which the film character clearly did (voice, body shape, craggy face). So yeah, fiction, let's enjoy it as such.

Glad you posted this as I thought the same. I thought the ending not just biologically implausible (whereas the book extract, which I haven’t read but someone kindly posted, does make sense) but purely from a narrative point of view a bit weak.

by which I mean not so much the twist as the fact that one very short speech suddenly made everyone vote for him, despite the fact that he turned up basically unvetted and no one knew his opinions on anything at all! Friend I went with who has read book said it was a bit more gradual there so it’s a screen play thing I guess

Ps also I love Isabella Rossellini so she deserves it for other things, but amazing you can get a supporting actress nomination for about 4 lines of dialogue and 5 mins of screen time!

I saw this film and really enjoyed it. I’m very glad about this thread though, because my initial thought was that the ending seemed impossible - to have evident male characteristics eg voice, face shape etc, and also an actual uterus. I did a lot of googling to try to find out what this condition would be. But I found nothing that matched. So I am pleased to see that this is because nothing does. And also that what’s in the book (which I havn’t read) actually is plausible. Seems odd that the film-makers didn’t just stick with that. And clearly did no research to check that what they suggested instead might ever happen. Although if they had stuck to the book plot it might have been difficult to find a suitable actor that didn’t just immediately give the fact away of the character not being male. Easier in a book!

The entire movie was very compelling up until the surprise twist at the end which just ruined it for me. I was brought up with a Jewish mother and Catholic father so think I know a bit about conflict! This didn't cut it.

The book says he was raised as a boy, but never shaved, the vestments were all too large, and he had been booked in for surgery to correct a fusion of the labia and a clitoropexy, but did not attend. So, female?
What did the film say?

The film said he'd been raised at a boy and been through adolescence in a seminary where the culture was 'modest', so presumably hadn't had any kind of comparison with other boys and men, and that during surgery to remove his appendix the fact that he had a uterus had been discovered. He had intended to have a hysterectomy and resign the priesthood, but the Pope wouldn't accept his resignation and had made him a cardinal 'in pectori' (i.e. in secrecy).

I saw the film and thought it was very good, the detail discussed here was lost on me l

Although I was disappointed that there was no one at the intermission with a tray of ice-cream tubs - in fact there was no intermission at all!

There aren't any intermissions these days. Something from the fifties and sixties

The Brutalist had an Intermission!

(it’s 3.5 hours long)

Thanks. From Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovotesticular_syndrome#Prevalence