ABSTRACT

Qualitative researchers have long observed that rationales for medical interventions on intersex characteristics, or variable sex characteristics (VSC), invoke heteronormative ideals. Such medical interventions are controversial and described as infringing human rights. Recent survey research has confirmed that support for medical intervention, and opposition to its legal limitation on human rights grounds is predicted by (1) identifying as heterosexual and (2) endorsing gender binary beliefs. We replicated both findings here among 59 LGB+ and 61 heterosexual participants. Opinions about medical interventions on intersex characteristics were additionally predicted by belief in heterosexual complementarity among all participants, and by strength of heterosexual identification among heterosexual-identified participants. Participants read excerpts from three published interviews with a medical professional, a parent of a child with intersex characteristics, and an adult with intersex characteristics and generated analogies to these experiences. Participants who generated more diverse analogies endorsed the gender binary and medical interventions less, and supported legal limitations more. The results are discussed in relation to the formation and distribution of public attitudes to the controversial medicalisation of intersex characteristics.

摘要

定性研究人员长期以来一直观察到，对双性特征或可变性特征(VSC) 进行医学干预的基本原理会引发异性恋理想。这种医疗干预是有争议的，并被描述为侵犯人权。最近的调查研究证实，通过（1）确定为异性恋和（2）支持性别二元信仰，可以预测对医疗干预的支持和反对其对人权的法律限制。我们在 59 名 LGB+ 和 61 名异性恋参与者中复制了这两个发现。对双性人特征的医疗干预的意见还通过所有参与者之间对异性互补性的信念以及异性恋认同的参与者之间的异性恋认同。参与者阅读了与医学专业人士、具有双性特征儿童的父母和具有双性特征的成年人的三篇已发表访谈的摘录，并对这些经历进行了类比。产生更多不同类比的参与者较少支持性别二元和医疗干预，而更多地支持法律限制。讨论结果与公众对有争议的双性特征医学化态度的形成和分布有关。