From the moment we are born, we tend to accept everything we are taught as immutable facts of life. In fact, this information is shaped by factors such as the period in which we are born, our culture, and family structure. Because this coding is carried out in such an intense and systematic manner, we sometimes dedicate our entire lives to these identities. Yet, seemingly harmless categories, claimed to be “natural and normal,” are the world’s most fundamental problem. Indeed, relations of power and power domination are created precisely through these identities and the various meanings attributed to them. Furthermore, some institutions in many fields, such as medicine, science, religion, and art, either prove these artificial meanings in their own way or undertake the task of infiltrating communities (individuals).
Non-heteronormative identities, previously classified as illnesses by the World Health Organization, were recently removed from this category. However, more and more people have begun to question themselves and societal norms. Intersex bodies, which transcend the boundaries of the distribution of hormones, organs, or chromosomes labeled female or male, are evidence of the fragility of this binary schema. Throughout this article, we will explore the diversity of identity and relatedness within the framework of the naturalistic and scientifically validated concept of intersex. Moreover, by questioning the power mechanisms that produce normal and abnormal, central and other, we will reveal ways for individuals to unleash their own potential. By examining non-binary concepts of gender, we will explore diverse and nurturing forms of relatedness.
Invalidating the Panopticon That Reduces Relationships and Bodies to Reproduction
Theorist and author Monique Wittig, the architect of the phrase “heterosexual contract”, points out that categories such as female, male, and woman are not natural classifications, but political ones. These classes are rooted in the mechanisms of power that reduce sentient beings to a single concept like reproduction. According to philosopher Michel Foucault, what we consider to be the most natural or personal, such as “sexuality, body, identity,” are actually determined by power. This creates the illusion in individuals that they are free to make their own decisions and choices. Wittig argues that the heterosexual system or the power mechanism must be directly destroyed. Thus, categories such as woman, man, girl, boy, and female, marketed as normal and natural, are master-slave narratives (dialectics, dichotomies) created to control us.
Philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Pierre-Félix Guattari argue that the tree metaphor is decisive for the dominant thought system in the world. Here, the tree is hierarchical, structured as root, trunk, and branches. The branches of this artificial tree are also divided into two, as seen in examples such as “good-bad, man-woman, mind-body, human-nature, and east-west”. On the other hand, it is vertical, fixed, congeals fluidity and life, and claims to reach the root, that is, it constantly searches for a fundamental cause, an origin. Based on this, Deleuze and Guattari propose the “rhizome” model. More precisely, identities are like a network, meaning they exist at the infinite intersection of diverse experiences woven through interests, emotions, and relationships. While the tree of power locks individuals into one of two colors, such as black and white, in the rhizome understanding, individuals are like light passing through a prism. They contain colors and tones and transform into one another at every moment. Therefore, every existence is unique and is expressed in different colors and tones at every moment.
Intersex and the Liberation of Body Components from Power
Intersex, an umbrella term, can be explained as the innate physical characteristics such as hormones, chromosomes, or genitalia that do not conform to the definitions of male, female, or feminine. Just as writing with the left hand is not a disease in a society where the majority is accustomed to writing with the right hand, intersex is not a deviation from what is “natural, normal” or a disease. However, in a system structured around domination over living beings, intersex people are forced into so-called male or female bodies. Some individuals who undergo “adaptation” surgeries may experience extremely negative experiences, such as subsequent surgeries, serious health problems, or suicidal thoughts. Yet, it is estimated that the number of intersex people in the world is equal to the number of redheads. This means that approximately one in every 60-70 people is intersex.
Surgeries, which were performed for years under the guise of health problems, have actually been understood to be medical violence. These “normalization” impositions, produced at the expense of intersex people’s mental health or their very lives, operate parallel to the principle of trying to force everyone into a heterosexual mold. Biopower reduces the existence of sentient and feeling beings to reproduction through penetration. Hence, individuals approach themselves and those they interact with as commodities. Driven by internalized fear, the individual attempts to adapt to a mechanized society portrayed as the majority. They are now trapped in a conceptual world where feelings and genuine contact are suppressed. Forms of connection often take the form of choosing a car at a car dealership. Instead of genuine connection, the emphasis is on auto body polish.
Conclusion
Psychoanalyst Ian Parker emphasizes that remaining neutral about gender and heterosexuality in therapy and psychoanalysis also reproduces power relations. Emphasizing that gender and heterosexuality are ideological constructs, Parker argues that every discourse and action reconstructs reality in a specific way. They argue that heteronormative discourses and manipulations limit and shallow individuals’ experiences and lives. Consequently, they create ideal puppets and tools of production for internal power, not authentic individuals and relationships. Literary theorist and philosopher Kojin Karatani discusses how the “inner man” is created in literature. The inner man Karatani speaks of is precisely the embodiment of biopower. They constantly define the “outer world and others” from the perspective of the “self”.
“Intersex, X” existences are concrete realities that overturn the fiction that biology and life are divided into binary polarities and exist in opposition. This categorical system of thought instrumentalizes all sentient beings. In this construct, which reduces humans to vague categories like female, male, heterosexual, and homosexual, “nature” is also pitted against humans. As in examples like “dairy cow, breeding female or male, egg or meat chicken”, sentient beings are positioned as objects of someone’s selfish and insatiable desire for pleasure. The structure that labels some as stronger or more valuable and others as weak or worthless due to their physical characteristics is a lie. Yet, beyond all these schemas, identities, and the meanings attributed to them, there are also relational and communicative realms experienced through feeling. Finally, for example, the search for deep and solid connection in a genderless “demisexual” desire neutralizes the system that instrumentalizes sentient beings.
References
● Wittig, M. (1992). The Straight Mind and Other Essays. Beacon Press.
● Karatani, K. (1993). Origins of Modern Japanese Literature (B. Bary, Trans.). Duke University Press.
● Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1980).
● Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). Pantheon Books.
● Parker, I. (2007). Revolution in Psychology: Alienation to Emancipation. Pluto Press.