DSD: Sexism, Classism and Eugenics

DSD (Disorders of sex development): a sexist, classist ideology based on eugenics

A brief exposé by Curtis E. Hinkle

March 9, 2008

© 2008

1) What is sexism?

2) What is eugenics?

3) Who controls the definitions?

4) Who is fit to be born?

5) Is our sex a disorder?

1) What is sexism?

Sexism can be considered from different perspectives, both intricately related one to the other, one based on discrimination itself and the other on the division of all humans into legal sex categories which is the fundamental tool used to perpetuate and justify the discrimination.

Discrimination against people which is based on their sex assignment as male or female, instead of their individual merits, is sexist. This discrimination is so prevalent in our societies that it appears natural because we assume that the underlying binary division of all people into male and female is also natural, but it is not. Intersex people prove that it is not and it can be argued rather convincingly that the erasure of intersex as a natural sex variation is a result of the basic sexism which is considered normal in our society. Unfortunately, sexism is "normal" because there are medical and legal norms which justify this sexism. However, the fact that it is "normal" does not mean it is natural.

The most basic form of sexism is the biological essentialism (1) which is used to divide all humanity into just two legal categories - male and female with all deviations defined as pathological and in need of medical intervention to "correct" their sex. There would be no reason to justify this division of all humanity legally and medically into just two categories (2) if we felt there were no fundamental differences between these two categories and there would be no need to pathologize all intersex people as disorders of sex development if this unnatural division of all humanity as male or female were not politically motivated. (3)

2) What is eugenics?

"Eugenics is the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)."

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, (c) Random House, Inc. 2006.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eugenics

Eugenics has a very tragic, racist, classist history. (4) The nature of eugenics makes it a political ideology based on definitions of people which divide humanity into those who are fit and those who are unfit. The basic problem is that those who control the definitions are those who have political supremacy over disenfranchised populations. Denying the racist, sexist and classist history of eugenics is dangerous if one honestly wants to understand the political motivations behind eugenic movements.

In the 20th Century, abortion has been introduced as a tool for eugenic movements. This is very problematic because the conflation of women's rights with eugenics often obscures the underlying racism, sexism and classism involved in the justification of abortion as a eugenic tool. Both sides of this debate overlook the serious dangers and inequalities of women as a class. The pro-choice debate does not emphasize the lack of most women in the world to make a real choice because they are deprived of that power even when abortion is provided and this can often lead to the elimination of female fetuses. The pro-life debate fails to recognize the need for women to control their own bodies and have the right over reproductive decisions concerning their bodies.

Instead of dealing with the serious oppression of people based on race, sex and class, upper middle-class pro-choice models of abortion as the model for feminism assumes that women who are lacking almost all control of their reproductive rights can benefit from such a model. What can often happen is the choice to eliminate females and all deviations from male and female with only male births being favored. (5)

3) Who controls the definitions?

Those in charge of the definitions which determine who are male and female and whose sex is a genetic defect is a group of predominantly, Euro-centric male medical experts: the Lawson Wilkins Pediatrics Endocrine Society along with Eric Vilain and Alice Dreger both associated with the Intersex Society of North America (ISNA). This is the group which is responsible for the Chicago Consensus Statement on Management of Intersex Disorders which redefined intersex as a genetic defect and recommended the new "disorder" terminology with "intersex" being replaced by "disorders of sex development". (6)

This same group published the following consensus statement on CAH which recommends surgery on intersex infants between 2 and 6 months of age:

Consensus Statement on 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency from The Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society and The European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology (Joint LWPES/ESPE CAH Working Group)

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/87/9/4048

4) Who is fit to be born?

Those who are closest to the ones who control the definitions. Let's be honest and stop trying to justify racism, sexism and this abuse of power over us just because those in charge of the definitions are powerful and have great influence around the world. We are not fit to be born because we do not look like them; we do not act like them and we are a threat to their two-sex system which keeps them in a privileged position. They are "fit" simply because they control the definitions of who is fit.

5) Is our sex, that is intersex, a disorder?

We in OII firmly reject the idea that our sex is a disorder and we therefore reject the pathological definition of our sex as a "disorder of sex development" or DSD. The real danger and disorders are the racism and sexism which are developing eugenic ideologies and technologies to deal with what are social problems. Instead of empowering and valuing sex variations, the solution is to eliminate us.

Open discussions about the abuse of power by those who control the definitions is one important way to confront the real problem - eugenics, Euro-centric racism and male patriarchal models of power which are at risk of collapse if the current binary male/female dichotomies are not firmly held as sacrosanct.

We in OII do not accept the current male/female binary categories imposed on all people in most countries as sacrosanct and hope that others will help us confront the political agenda of those who would eliminate us.

Footnotes:

(1) "Biological Essentialism: Biological essentialism refers to the idea that men and women are intrinsically different due to some internal essence. Biological essentialists argue that men and women are distinct from one another and that they are opposites. They claim that gender differences aren’t really differences in gender but that they reflect a biologically based difference that is consistent across cultures. Furthermore, biological essentialists stipulate that there is no variation in the expression of biologically essential characteristics."

http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Bookstore/2603/NEW261Y_Definitions.html

(2) Project 1-0-1 intersex

http://www.101intersex.de/index.php?=SID&sprache=En

(3) RACISM and SEXISM: A COLLECTIVE STRUGGLE: A MINORITY WOMAN'S POINT OF VIEW By Valerie Russell

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/wlm/racesex/

(4) Brief history of eugenics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#History

(5) What Is Gendercide? http://www.gendercide.org/

(6) Alice Dreger and some other women who have great privilege within the two-sex system have played a prominent role in pathologizing sex variations. For more information: click here

Alice Dreger: The unethical ethicist?

By Curtis E. Hinkle

© 2008

February 29, 2008

Alice Dreger, the DSD activist, who bills herself as a bioethicist has over the past few years become mired by one ethical scandal after another. Just to mention a few of her scandals, let me start with what will be one of the major setbacks in intersex history. It was Alice Dreger who was one of the prime movers of the shift from “intersex” to DSD, “disorders of sex development”. She did this by consulting with doctors and determining what worked for them and consulted the intersex community after the change had been made. Quite unethical for an ethicist because there is practically no support for this replacement of the term “intersex” with “disorders of sex development” and the ensuing Consensus Statement (1) which approved this change of terminology which elaborated a set of protocols that are a major setback for intersex people with surgery being recommended between two and six months of age. (2) This was a scandal of historical proportions.

After controlling intersex activism for over a decade and leaving it in shambles, she decided to move on to transgender activism. And already she is becoming the same divisive “activist” in the transgender movement that she was in the intersex movement. She has begun by taking sides with the gatekeepers of the trans movement, just as she placed herself with the gatekeepers of the intersex community and then left us with a more pathological terminology and set of protocols based on intersex being a genetic defect. (3)

As she started her trans activism, many of us in the intersex movement saw the same pattern slowly emerge that had been her hallmark within the intersex movement – siding with proponents of a highly problematic, pathological definition of transsexualism and attacking any opponents who resisted the academic and discursive control she was usurping over their own right to self definition and in determining their own sociopolitical agenda without having to contend with another interloper who had no experiential understanding of trans issues.

All of a sudden she picked a fight with Andrea James and tried to prevent Ms. James from being allowed to speak at the university where Alice Dreger works and alleged she was afraid of Andrea James. It was quite odd that the organization which invited Ms. James to speak at Northwestern University where Dreger works was evidently not frightened by Andrea James. Dreger decided to use the Bush foreign policy model of a pre-emptive strike against anyone who might possibly be viewed as a threat and published “The blog I write in fear” (4) in which she brought up an unfortunate event that had happened a few years ago between her colleague J Michael Bailey and Andrea James. She alleged she was frightened of Andrea and that she should not be allowed to speak at the University. This is the strawman that has been used for years now to silence any discussion of the unethical behavior that Bailey and Dreger have been involved in. Instead of dealing with the facts of their own behavior, anyone who dares discuss the facts is automatically smeared with ad hominem attacks linking them to the serious mistake that Andrea James made a few years ago. Dreger even did this to me when I openly questioned her DSD model as a replacement for intersex. (5) Instead of dealing with what she was doing, Dreger sent out an e-mail alleging that I had teamed up with Andrea James, someone I didn’t know at the time, and warned intersex people that if they were not vigilant, the intersex movement would be destroyed. Well, that was already a fait accompli and it was Dreger who was instrumental in its destruction. Many of us are trying to rebuild and move on.

We later found out why Dreger was alleging she was so afraid of Andrea James. She was working at the same University as J Michael Bailey and she was writing an article in defense of his unethical behavior and she was going to include Andrea James in that article. It certainly would be good fodder for the article if she could have provoked Andrea to get more dirt on her to include in her upcoming “exposé” of the “facts” to suit her employer, Northwestern University.

Dreger then published a 60-page tome in defense of her colleague, J Michael Bailey and in that article she once again threw ethics out the window and simply gives Bailey another platform to justify having sex with research subjects: “there is nothing intrinsically wrong or forbidden about having sex with a research subject[….] Some of my colleagues have had sex with their research subjects, because it is not unusual to ask one’s romantic partner to be a subject” (Bailey, 2005).” Rather disturbing ethical standards that Dreger is disseminating in this tome in defense of her colleague. (6)

Finally, someone is challenging Dreger on her ethics and many of us in the intersex community feel it is high time. Robin Mathy has filed ethics complaints with the American Psychological Association against Dreger and Bailey. One of the allegations in the complaint centers on Dreger and Bailey having both expressed that having sex with a research subject is not inherently wrong. Robin Mathy has also filed a complaint with the Illinois Board of Examiners of Psychology against Bailey for allegedly misrepresenting himself as a psychologist. (7)

It does appear that Robin Mathy has a lot of facts to substantiate these allegations along with many others. Ethics? Alice Dreger’s ethics seem to be focused on what is best for her career and gaining access to more power, not helping the powerless which she now has a history of dismissing, silencing and abusing.

Notes:

(1) Consensus Statement on Management of Intersex Disorders

http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/118/2/e488

(2) This is a quote from the Same group that gave us the Consensus Statement on DSD's.

Consensus Statement on 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency from The Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society and The European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology Joint LWPES/ESPE CAH Working Group

Surgery is recommended at age 2-6 months:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Once a decision has been made to raise a newborn as female, surgery for those with virilized genitalia caused by CAH is recommended when the patient has a high proximal junction between the vagina and urethra (12, 13). Surgery on infants with ambiguous genitalia requires a high degree of expertise and should only be performed in centers with significant experience. Based on recent clinical experience, the recommended time for surgery is at age 2–6 months; although, at present, this is not universal practice. It is important to note that surgery at this stage is technically easier than at later stages."

You can download the complete Consensus Statement on CAH at:

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/87/9/4048

(3) Alice Dreger: Disorders of Sex Development

http://www.intersexualite.org/AliceDreger.html

(4) “The Blog I Write in Fear”. May 13, 2006.

http://www.alicedreger.com/in_fear.html

(5) Email from Alice Dreger to some intersex activists

http://www.intersexualite.org/AliceDreger.html#anchor_26

(6) “In his online self-defense piece, “Academic McCarthyism,” published in October 2005, Bailey countered with this: “her ‘complaint’ is not true. The alleged event never happened. If I ever needed to do so, I could prove this, but there is no reason why I should” (Bailey, 2005). Bailey’s reasoning for why he should not have to prove he didn’t have sex with Juanita was twofold: first, he “insist[ed] that Juanita was not a research subject” when she claimed they had sex; second, “there is nothing intrinsically wrong or forbidden about having sex with a research subject[….] Some of my colleagues have had sex with their research subjects, because it is not unusual to ask one’s romantic partner to be a subject” (Bailey, 2005).”

Dreger, Alice. 2007. The Controversy Surrounding The Man Who Would Be Queen: A

Case History of the Politics of Science, Identity, and Sex in the Internet Age. p. 43

(7) Debate resumes on methods of psych professor's research by Michael Gsovski

Issue date: 2/27/08

http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=c6222fa5-96dd-47ee-b912-c58a9874fbdf

Against sexists in “Blackface”

by Curtis E. Hinkle
© 2008
Translated and adapted from the French
French available at:
http://www.intersexualite.org/Curtis.html#anchor_27

Video depicting blackface performances and iconography and the implications of the commercialization of such stereotypes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kc4EwD5hoA

Changing one’s body does not necessarily change the identity of the individual in the body. This concept is essential to intersex activism. Otherwise, early surgical interventions on intersex infants would be easier to justify and rationalize.

Studying intersex in an academic setting does not change one’s identity either.

I would like to briefly discuss certain sexist tendencies that I do not personally like and I see a lot of commonalities between these particular sexist tendencies and certain elements from the racist history of the United States involving the tradition of performing in blackface.

I often see intersections between the struggles against racism and sexism. Those who are intersexed, victims of a brutal sexist system which often robs us of both our body and our identity, often need to be aware of the risks of sexist movements and their appropriation of our own visibility because there are many risks involved in our struggle for visibility in a world where we are not allowed to exist as human beings with full human rights.

This was true of African American slaves also. There were people who felt they had only the best of intentions who ultimately ended up creating some of the most damaging racist elements of American culture which did not help end racism despite all their good intentions. They actually reinforced the very slavery of the individuals they were trying to help by elaborating an artistic representation of stereotypes which are still very deeply rooted in the American consciousness. Images, theatrical performances, and music are extremely effective forms of communication and almost all propaganda is reinforced by an arsenal of iconographic representations which serve to embed the message more concretely than words alone can.

It is important to point out that I am specifically referring to artistic, academic and exhibitionistic iconographies which are focused on the “freak” body of intersex people and not the personal choices of intersex people themselves concerning their own clothing, what aspects of their own appearance they which to emphasize in a more positive manner or their own conceptualization of the intersexuality. I am specifically limiting this comparison to performances and other iconographic representations, both artistic and academic, which are intended to help those concerned, the intersexed.

“Performers with their faces blackened with burnt cork or blackface started appearing on the American stage towards the end of the 17th Century; they usually represented servants whose role was only to provide a brief moment of comic relief [1] with the intention nevertheless to make people laugh by mimicking the “Blacks of the Plantation”. It is important to note that the birthplace of the blackface minstrels was not the Deep South but the abolitionist North.” [2]

People often mistakenly believe that blackface performances have their roots in the Deep South of the United States. “In 1922 there were still serious debates in the pages of the New York Herald about who were the best actors depicting Black people, Whites or Blacks themselves. And we must remember that the minstrel was born in the anti-slavery environment of the North in the most sophisticated and most cosmopolitan city of America.” [3]

Those who started doing these performances were White people who wanted to help slaves and their ideas about Blacks were that they were content, obliging and musical, etc. They started performing in blackface but what they actually ended up doing was the commercialization and marketing of stereotypes intended primarily for the White public who were the consumers of the productions and it was the White public which controlled the market. Ultimately, African Americans themselves started performing in blackface in order to present their own talent to a public which was overwhelmingly White: a reinforcement of their own invisibility.

In my opinion, the same mechanisms are in play when a person enlarges their clitoris and becomes exhibitionistic and starts talking about intersex issues as if their choice for clitoral enlargement somehow helps them understand intersex issues. The same mechanisms are in play when an academic feels she has the right to help us without even consulting us and who writes protocols full of demeaning terms with an abject focus on genetic defects. These are all stereotypes, whether artistic or academically generated. The important point is that they are NOT generated for and by the people most directly affected, the intersexed themselves.

No matter how much the Whites wanted to help, putting on blackface and speaking for Blacks did not make them Black. It was racist. The same applies to certain help from non-intersexed people. No matter what they do, they are not intersexed and their help often ends up simply reinforcing the iconography of stereotypes already prevalent for intersexed people. Sexism sells just as racism does because the consumers who control the market and the production of stereotypical images, pathological diagnoses, etc. are not us. It is them.

[1] http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Shakki/Traduc

[2] D'Emett Miller à Eminem : Chanteurs blancs, coeurs noirs ?
http://orta.dynalias.org/archivesrouge/article-rouge?id=4460

[3] Blackface :au confluent des voix mortes par Nick Tosches p. 19
Éditions Allia, Paris, 2003.

Gina Wilson

Gina Wilson - OII Support and Outreach Coordinator (Australia)

Gina Wilson was born in rural Victoria in the early fifties with a form of salt wasting CAH and complicated X chromosomes.

She survived significant childhood sexual abuse as a result of her (so called) "ambiguous" genital appearance. Her recovery from sex abuse is her greatest achievement.

She lived androgynously and isolated for most of her life until she undertook a course of abuse recovery. At about that time she had the last of a series of surgeries that sought to rectify some aspects of her CAH and most of the "corrective" surgery she received as an infant. Her CAH is now mostly controlled .

She has a degree in aeronautical engineering and another in electronics. She spent a good deal of her life restoring and flying old areoplanes and specialised in the life of type extension of ex-military jets.

She is now retired and devotes much of my time to writing, literature and the visual arts.

She met her life partner after she had made some progress in her abuse recovery. (She was able to touch people at last). They have been together for some years now. That would have to be the best thing in her life and has made some sense of all that went before it.

She is the primary caregiver of a 96 year old friend and involves herself in some aged care welfare work.

She is active with intersex groups, child abuse survivor and child abuse recovery groups, suicide and mental illness awareness and support groups.

OII-USA member, David Cameron, and his partner Peter featured in film

"One in 2000" is a 26-minute piece that is being sent out to several festivals. The producer and artist of this film also hopes to distribute it either through the educational circuit or perhaps PBS or cable access stations.

See below for festival showings in your area.

If you have any suggestions as to other venues to send it, please inform Ajae, the producer, by writing directly to her at the following address:
aclearway@austin.rr.com

PREVIOUS FESTIVALS:

TEXAS
Cinematexas
September 20-24, 2006
www.cinematexas.org
Austin, TX

AGLIFF
Austin Gay Lesbian International Film Festival
September 29-October 8
Austin, TX
www.agliff.org
Part of "Black & White" program
"One in 2000" screening
2:40 PM, Oct 7, 2006
Regal Arbor Cinema

CALIFORNIA
Mill Valley Film Festival
October 5-15, 2006
www.mvff.com


ARKANSAS
Hot Springs Documentary Film Festival
October 20-29, 2006
www.hsdfi.org

INTERNATIONAL
NextFrame Film Festival
(UFVA) University Video Association's Touring Festival of
International Student Film & Video
"One in 2000" wins 1st Place in Documentary Program
www.temple.edu/nextframe/

Three intersex activists defend children against pejorative terminology

Three intersex activists who were included in the manual of the DSD guidelines have now made it clear that they do not agree with the new terminology. When they agreed to have their experiences and intersex histories included, they were not fully informed of the actual terminology nor all the implications of the publications of the Consortium for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development.

We in OII-USA wish to express our deep gratitude to David Cameron, Peter Trinkl and Esther Morris Leidolf for their courageous stand against this pejorative terminology. What they have done is very powerful and helps all of us in our struggle to live openly and without shame. They worked to help change the current health care of intersex children but have the courage to make their feelings known about this terminology which is consistent with their reason for agreeing to participate in the first place. You can read the disclaimer which is now in the web version of the DSD guidelines.

Excerpt from the DSD Guidelines:

“We are grateful for the participation of David Cameron, Peter Trinkl, and Esther Morris Leidolf in this project. However, they would like to make it known that they do not support the term “Disorders of Sex Development.”

To read the excerpt in context:
http://www.dsdguidelines.org/htdocs/parents/acknowledgements.html

OII-USA Spokesperson for Human Rights

David Cameron attended his first ISNA support group meeting in 1995 and within the year became ISNA’s first volunteer! He served as a board member from Dec. ’02 through Dec. ’05. As a person with XXY sex chromosomes, David has written about his experience in Hermaphrodites with Attitude, Chrysalis, and Alice Dreger’s book Intersex In the Age of Ethics.

As an adult, David was hormonally masculinized by testosterone therapy without his “informed” consent.He served as an appointed member to the San Francisco Human Rights Commission LGBT Advisory Committee and was a member of their Intersex Task Force. This Task Force was the first governmental organization in the U.S. to organize a public hearing on intersex treatments that involve gender assignments. After the historic hearing in May 2004, the Task Force developed the Intersex Report, with findings and recommendations, and was adopted by the Human Rights Commission in May 2005.

David lives in San Francisco with his domestic partner, Peter, whom he met in 1978.

Chronology of David Cameron’s Intersex Human Rights Activism

1995 – Attended first ISNA emotional support group – learned that Klinefelter’s Syndrome is an intersex variation via Cheryl Chase. Wrote article for "Chrysalis"and ISNA newsletter "Hermaphrodites with Attitude." Attended KS&A Conference in Baltimore. They refused to call Klinefelter's syndrome an intersex condition and wouldn't discuss gender variant issues.

1996 – Joined Cheryl, Suegee and others giving a panel presentation to the Human Rights Commission’s LGBT Advisory Committee on our intersex issues. Was interviewed by Alice Dreger for a book (in my backyard).

1996 to 1998 – Became Cheryl’s first volunteer to create ISNA, took over and led support group, began volunteering in ISNA offices on Fulton and Mission Streets answering letters and sending out requested information, etc. Wrote Chapter 8 in Intersex and the Age of Ethics.

2000-2001 – Appointed by SF Board of Supervisors to serve on Transgender Civil Rights Implementation Task Force (TGCRITF) as an intersex person. Ms. Chase writes letter of recommendation. I’m able to educate and remove intersex from Transgender umbrella. HRC agrees that intersex is it’s own umbrella term.

2002 – Joined working group of HRC LGBTAC on “Gender Identity” issues as a community member. Present another panel to LGBTAC with Hida Viloria on intersex issues. Join ISNA Board of Directors.

2003 – Joined Ms. Chase, Thea Hillman, Ben Lunine (HRC intern) to speak at SF Human Rights Commissioners meeting on intersex. Commissioners call for hearing.

Sacramento Bee staff writes article announcing hearing.

Early 2004 – Appointed to HRC LGBTAC as their first intersex member. Intersex Task Force created (intersex community and transgender members volunteer to serve) with intention of creating public hearing on intersex issues with SF Human Rights Commissioners. This occurs on May 27 for 4 hours in room 416 at San Francisco City Hall. My Domestic Partner, Peter Tannen, and I make donation to “Friends of the HRC” to pay SFGTV to film proceedings for visual public record. Intersex Task Force continues to work with Marcus Arana (HRC staff) to write Intersex Report with “Findings and Recommendations” to hopefully be implemented.

April 2005 – Intersex Report adopted by Commissioners and HRC sends out Press Release. Only one newspaper responds with brief article. SF Board of Supervisors pass resolution announcing “Intersex Awareness Day” as October 26^th. Supervisor Bevan Dufty’s office sponsors.

Late 2005 –Hand deliver 3 Intersex Reports and letter requesting meeting with Assemblyman Mark Leno’s office. Phone calls/emails go unanswered. Contacted NCLR, Equality California and Lambda Legal for support on report’s “Recommendations.” Get none. Phone requests and emails not answered. Left ISNA Board of Directors at end of year. Discovered Lambda Letters Project (LLP)on the web. Become member as they include Intersex in their LGBTI legislative issues section.

2006 – Contacted Supervisor Bevan Dufty’s office for assistance on implementing Intersex Report’s recommendations. Referred to his staff. Take administrative aide, Rachelle McManus, out to lunch and give her copy of report. Was told she would read recommendations and get back to me. Still haven't heard. Phone calls/emails go unanswered. Article (by me) published in Lambda Legal e-news as requested by former ISNA intern Mary Keiterborn. Help ISNA review Guidelines for Clinicians and Handbook for Parents. Request that they change name from Disorders of Sex Development to Variations of Sex Development. ISNA adopts DSD language. In fall, Peter Trinkl and I attend LLP Board of Directors meeting at Shriner’s Hospital in Sacramento. Wrote article for Bay Area Reporter on “Being Different and Fitting In.”

Dec. 2, 2006 – Howard Devore, Anne Tamar-Mattis, Peter Trinkle and I meet with LLP’s chief lobbyist, Boyce Hinman in San Francisco to discuss Intersex issues and how to move them forward with state legislation. Show “XXXY” and “One in 2000” to further educate Boyce on our issues. He suggests that we start with a hearing at a State Health Committee meeting, chaired by Shiela Khuel. Can not gather enough local support for this to happen.

Dec. 5, 2006 – Peter Trinkl and I met with HR Commissioners Dunlap and Chung, and HRC staff Marcus Arana and Larry Brinkin to lobby adding intersex to the LGBTAC name (after spending two years doing everything they asked us to do). Request was denied.

October 2006 - Organized an intersex panel for Cancer Conference (part of the larger GLMA conference) in San Francisco. Had Milton Diamond and Max Beck flown in to participate.

October 2006 - Hosted first ever "Hermaphrodites with Attitude" 10-year anniversary party in my home. Mani Bruce Mitchell (from new Zealand) helped organize the gathering. Many intersex people and their supporters attend.

Interviewed by Catherine Harper for her book, Intersex.

Feb. 18, 2007 – meeting in SF with LLP and community members canceled because of need to interface with Intersex Roundtable outcomes. Attend 3-day roundtable, representing Organization Intersex International as their Intersex Human Rights Spokesperson. Future legislation nixed by attendees of roundtable. Feb. 20^th last meeting as member of the Human Rights Commission's LGBTAC.

2007 Joined advisory board for the Institute for Intersex Children and the Law. Name changed to Advocates for Informed Choice (Summer ’07).

2007 Fall - became Intersex Outreach Director for Marriage Equality USA. Will try to educate them beyond the 2 sex/2 gender system they tend to reinforce.

Since starting my intersex activism 13 years ago, I have spoken to numerous pre-med students, church groups, schools, and other venues on my experience as an intersex person with a sex chromosome variation and plan to continue to do so.