Confusing statement about treatment for intersex being a victory for trans community

[IwantToRetire]

I feel a bit bad about making this a thread topic as it is clearly quite something to win the Women's Prize for fiction with your first novel.

And I am not meaning or wanting in any way to make this a personal attack.

But surely calling this trans treatment isn't right? Or have I got it wrong?

Van der Wouden revealed in her acceptance speech that she is intersex. “I was a girl until I turned 13, and then as I hit puberty all that was supposed to happen did not quite happen, or if it did happen it happened too much,” she said. “I won’t thrill you too much with the specifics but the long and the short of it is that hormonally I am intersex.”

“This little fact defined my life throughout my teens until I advocated for the healthcare that I needed. In the few precious moments here on stage I am receiving truly the greatest honour of my life as a woman, presenting to you as a woman and accepting this Women’s prize and that is because of every single trans person who’s fought for healthcare, who changed the system, the law, societal standards, themselves. I stand on their shoulders.”

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/jun/12/womens-prize-debut-yael-van-der-wouden-the-safekeep-rachel-clarke-the-story-of-a-heart

And this isn't the Guardian twisting her words, because other papers have posted snippets and this seems the fullest.

So my confusion is whether it is true that the treatment for a biological women with DSD has only become (more) available since medical intervention for men who want to transition has become more common.

If she wants to identify as part of the trans and queer community that's her right.

I am just hoping someone with the right medical knowledge can explain what she might be referring to.

Sorry if this is a really ignorant question.

Do we hear much directly from people with DSDs on this board? There are lots of posters who seem knowledgeable about the science but I'm always a bit uncomfortable with the act of speaking about other people's experiences for them (my gateway criticism of trans ideology was men telling women what womanhood meant).

Thinking about the trans man poster a few weeks ago (I'm sorry I can't remember your name off the top of my head) and how insightful their comments on their own experiences were - some had been said by others on the board already of course or shared from other sites, but the dialogue itself was really valuable I thought.

To clarify - I'm not suggesting anyone out themselves or anyone else as having a DSD.

I can think of at least two posters who have been on this board over the past couple of years who have discussed their experiences of having a DSD. They, unsurprisingly, expressed a wish that the gender ideology lot would stop weaponising their experiences of what can be some very difficult medical issues in order to present the nonsense of a 'third sex'.

Yes, I thought at first, why mention it at all? And having mentioned it, why be so cryptic about what the condition is, because it will just lead to lots of speculation.

But she's got a book to sell, so that's why.

Thank you, good to know. And I'm glad I asked the question as possibly helpful for other newer readers/lurkers to know this as well.

This. I am very sceptical whenever a transactivist claims to be intersex.

Klinefelter Syndrome, Turner Syndrome

These are just rolled out because TRA think they are a gotcha because they are not XY or XX. Their oversimplistic thinking is that XXY is somehow a middle position between XX and XY.

In the longer article, she says she had surgery and hormones because she felt at odds with her gender presentation, and I therefore surmise that she is one of those less than 2 in 10,000 people who are born with a disparity between the gonads and the genitals. And that she elected to get rid of the gonads rather than grow up as a man with female genitals.

I know lots here think gonads are key, but what law of nature or logic dictates that she had to show more loyalty to her - invisible and previously unsuspected - gonads than to the genitally based gender identity she'd had all her life? And she now doesn't benefit from the thing that gives men power and privilege - a body shaped by male puberty.

It's nothing to do with trans.

It's nothing to do with trans.

But she thinks it is.

Just seen someone on Facebook claiming that c.5% of people are intersex, and suggesting that an exceptionally tall woman should count as intersex.

@proximalhumerous there is no end to the stupidity on social media.

I’m 5 11” would that count. I suspect it’ll be confusing for the children I birthed and breastfed. Hey ho if Facebook said it, it must be true 😉

For the avoidance of doubt, I think it's utter nonsense!

I don't usually pay close attention to the Women's Prize for Fiction, but I wondered if some related issue had arisen before, and Wiki gives me this:

In 2019, Akwaeke Emezi's debut novel, Freshwater, was nominated – the first time a non-binary transgender author has been nominated for the prize. Women's prize judge Professor Kate Williams said that the panel did not know Emezi was non-binary when the book was chosen, but she said Emezi was happy to be nominated. Non-binary commentator Vic Parsons wrote that the nomination raised uncomfortable questions, asking: "would a non-binary author who was assigned male at birth have been longlisted? I highly doubt it."[45] After the nomination, it was announced that the Women's Prize Trust was working on new guidelines for transgender, non-binary, and genderfluid authors. The Women's Prize later asked for Emezi's "sex as defined by law" when submitting The Death of Vivek Oji for inclusion. Emezi chose to withdraw, and said that they would not submit their future novels for consideration, calling the requirement transphobic.[46] Joanna Prior, Chair of Trustees for the Women's Prize for Fiction, has stated that in the prize's terms and conditions, "the word 'woman' equates to a cis woman, a transgender woman, or anyone who is legally defined as a woman or of the female sex".[47]

Blinkety flip. Bullying rabbit rescue charities and now this bilge. They've really gone into warp drive since the SC ruling, haven't they? Is it a blunderbuss approach, spray and hope to hit something vital?

"...or anyone who is legally defined as a woman or of the female sex."

Well that would be an actual woman then, wouldn't it?

Haha!

Yes, it seems so. I wonder how high this inflation of intersex figures will go. Will it reach 33.3%??

My cat is of the female sex.

They don't seem to have learned the art of making up figures that seem vaguely plausible.

Good point. So's mine. Although her novel-writing credentials are in doubt.

What I genuinely don't understand is that no DSD I've looked at (not including PCOS - because it probably shouldn't be included) has an incidence above 1 in 650, so how this equates to anywhere near 2%, let alone higher, is anyone's guess.

And the bloody "as common as red hair" mantra drives me up the wall! I mean, so what? One thing is as common as another, completely unrelated, thing.

JFC, now apparently autism can be a gender.🙄

Red hair comparison also misleading because around 5% of U.K. population have red hair (10% in Scotland and Ireland)

Mine can tell a good novel when she is trying to persuade me I forgot to feed her. She can also prone to stories at 4am.

The reason that gender ideologists want to include women with PCOS under the 'intersex' umbrella is it's prevalence. The generally accepted estimate of women with (diagnosed) PCOS is approximately 1 in 10 of the female population of the UK. It's likely that level is higher because of the level of undiagnosed cases.

To be very, very clear, PCOS is not a DSD. It's just another example of force teaming to meet an agenda.

Quite. And about 0% in Africa and Asia.