Intersex and the rhetorics of disability and disorder: multiple and provisional significance in sexed, gender and disabled bodies
Journal of Disability and Religion (formerly Journal of Religion, Disability and Health)
Taylor & Francis (Routledge)
The impulse to make accounts of human sex, gender, and embodiment “mean” monolithically is inadequate. Engaging with David Kelsey’s theological anthropology, I suggest that a more appropriate means of figuring “marginal” bodies theologically is as multiply and provisionally significant. Such bodies may include disabled, intersex, and otherwise variantly sexed and gendered bodies. Although Kelsey does not engage in depth with questions of sex and gender, his assertion that human identity is grounded eccentrically nonetheless yield fruitfully for developing accounts of intersex, gender, ableness, and personhood. Further, I build on John Zizioulas’ claim that humans’ relationships with the world need not be determined by the laws of biology, and Hans Reinders’ reminder that human being-in-relation is grounded in divine self-giving. Christian overinvestment in binary sex-gender norms occurs because the Church has forgotten that personhood-in-God is primary, and that the bodily forms in which humans live are secondary to primary identity in God. KEYWORDS intersex, disorder of sex development, disability, theological anthropology
This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.
Vol. 19, pp. 106 - 118