Do intersex people's views on pronoun use count in sex and gender discussions?

[46XYDSD]

I want to raise a pronoun-related issue which I think has been largely ignored (if it hasn't, I'd be very interested to see where it's been discussed).

I belong to the "I" in the alphabet soup, although given that "Intersex" (i.e. DSDs) is neither an identity nor a sexuality (it is an umbrella term for a range of congenital medical disorders) I don't think it should be included. But that is another matter.

Anyway, given that I am included in the alphabet, I assume I'm allowed a say in how I feel about pronoun usage. (And if not, why not?)

My condition means that I have male chromosomes but am phenotypically female. I do not look (or act) remotely male. If someone were to ask me my pronouns - i.e. imply that it's not fucking obvious by taking one glance at me - I would be both offended and hurt.

So my question is: do the opinions of the other "letters" count on this issue, or is it only the "T" that matters?

I get rather irritated by people that try to forcibly team up people with DSDs with trans. Totally different situations. (I don’t know if I’m allowed an opinion either, but I’m the A in the alphabet soup)

My understanding is that they test for the SRY gene and therefore people with my condition could still compete.

Yes, I have wondered this as well.

Afaik it depends on the exact diagnosis.
The first test js SRY test, not XX/XY. And individuals with SRY positivr test, but CAIS (and maybe a few other conditions) can prove it and be eligible for female sport category, at least the tennis rules seems so

The question is that if the opinion of the T is the direct opposite of the opinion of the I, who takes precedence?

There is nothing internally or externally male about me; I don't even have ovaries producing testosterone, unlike typical women.

In this forum, we are (mostly) rooting for you in this question.

If I understand your condition correctly, your body is actually build about production of big gametes (though probably unable to actually produce them).

It is not fair that T crowd is abusing your kind of condition for their agenda.

How I see it, the DSD people didn't have a problem (in the social aspect, of course understanding your condition and finding health care able to deal with your condition in an informed way was probably as hard as for any other rare condition), before the T created one for you.

I have never asked anyone for his or her pronouns; my experience has been that anyone who gives a tuppenny one about other people "getting them right" when they are completely at odds with observed reality will have broadcast the information, and quite possibly wear a badge saying "My pronouns are fo/fum" just to make sure everyone knows.

So I'd assume that if you look female and are not making an attention-grabbing fuss about it, you probably want to be referred to by female pronouns, and that is what I'd do.

I would imagine that the vast majority of us wouldn't know whether we had ever met someone with this condition because they look female and were socialised as such.

Unlike trans identifying men, who still look like men, but and were socialised as men, and can only try to act a part as a woman.

I am pretty sure that the LGBT+ lobby only want the I because they want to pretend that sex is not a real and binary category, and therefore that gender identity must prevail.

But it's nonsense. People with DSDs are not some halfway point between the sexes. They are still men and women.

And even if they were it still wouldn't make gender identity to make sense. To take an analogy, if 99.999% of the world can be split into, say, blue and yellow but the remaining 0.001% are green, does that mean that A) blue and yellow are still useful categories and we should treat the few green people sensitively and try to accommodate them with dignity? Or B) Everyone can just decide if they are blue or yellow, and if you have any doubts about a yellow person claiming to be blue you are a massive bigot.

But it does seem to work on some people who don't think it through 🤷🏻‍♀️

I agree with all of this, and you're correct about the medical side of things.

Yes, agreed.

You are of no use nor interest to trans activism until and unless your medical status can be shoehorned in and/or used to their advantage regarding their spurious identity claims.

You can of course say what you want whenever you want, but unless it aligns with their viewpoint, you will be ignored (at best) or cast out (more likely) or actively and potentially violently cancelled in as many ways as necessary to shut you up (also not unlikely).

Women on the other hand will be fine with you speaking and thinking what you like, but most of them don't give a fuck about pronouns. There's probably far more interesting things about you to talk about anyway.

DIdn't the genderists, a few years ago, declare that some sizeable proportion of the population was 'intersex', by dint of including all women with PCOS, men with hypospadias etc etc?

They love to quote the (debunked) statistic that 1.7% of people are intersex and that it's as common as people having read hair. (As Helen Joyce says, as common as having red hair where? In Northern Ireland, or in North Korea?)

In my opinion, if your chromosomes match your phenotype and you're fertile then you're really stretching the definition of "intersex". However "Disorder of Sexual Development" might still be an appropriate definition for something like hypospadias.

yep. I believe Anne Fausto- Sterling popularised that stat.

LEONARD SAX REBUTTAL OF 1.7% ‘INTERSEX’ STATISTIC FROM FAUSTO - STERLING

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

How common is intersex? a response to Anne Fausto-Sterling

Leonard Sax, August 2002

Abstract
Anne Fausto-Sterling s suggestion that the prevalence of intersex might be as high as 1.7% has attracted wide attention in both the scholarly press and the popular media. Many reviewers are not aware that this figure includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, such as Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, and late-onset adrenal hyperplasia. If the term intersex is to retain any meaning, the term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female. Applying this more precise definition, the true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto-Sterling s estimate of 1.7%.

TL/DR

the true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto-Sterling s estimate of 1.7%.

It is also discussed here in this article :
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/intersex-is-not-as-common-as-red

Yep they say its 1.7% of the population ie as common as being redheaded which is completely nonsensical as possible is a female disease/disorder rather than a DSD