Viewpoints: October 2022

As Gordon Dangerfield states (Journal, September 2022, 6), in my letter (Journal, August 2022, 6) I stated that Stair knew there were persons who did not fit the simplistic “male or female” categorisation. Dangerfield takes issue with my statement, while at the same time acknowledging the existence of what they call a “statistically tiny” number of persons who do not fit the simplistic “male or female” categorisation. So in Dangerfield’s view the number of such persons being small, makes a statement that such persons exist false. As Walt Whitman once wrote, “Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself (I am large, I contain multitudes.” (Song of Myself)

Brian Dempsey, lecturer in law, University of Dundee

Brian Dempsey has been good enough to provide me with a copy of his reply to my letter.  

The whole point of my letter was that the existence of people born with intersex conditions in no way undermines the two (and only two) human sex categories. I sought to illustrate the point with the analogy of people born with one leg, whose existence in no way undermines the bipedal nature of the human species.   

Mr Dempsey believes apparently that having made this point, I then proceeded to negate it by denying the existence of intersex people – and presumably the existence of people with one leg – on which the point is premised.

Any such inexplicable denial by me is, I’m afraid, a figment of his own imagination.        

Gordon Dangerfield, solicitor advocate, Glasgow

In his previous letter Gordon Dangerfield stated that I perpetrate two logical fallacies which bring into question my fitness to be a lecturer at Dundee. In my original letter I did indeed point to the existence of persons who do not fit the simplistic either/or, male/female binary and that the long recognised existence of such persons problematises the simplistic binary. Dangerfield acknowledges that non-binary people exist, but then insists that that does not disturb the either/or binary. Assuming the word “logical” has some content, his position may not merit even the label logical fallacy. 

He also falsely asserts that my position was that if the medieval church was wrong on one thing (promoting marriage at 12 for girls), then that is proof that it was wrong in insisting on a simplistic sex and gender binary. My intention in drawing attention to these facts was to encourage sex- and gender-fundamentalists, many of whom say they are feminists, to reflect on at least the irony of the situation. 

Clearly I failed miserably to encourage any reflection on the part of your correspondent, but I am nonetheless pleased to say that my position at Dundee does not appear to be in immediate danger.

Brian Dempsey, lecturer in law, University of Dundee

This exchange is now closed. – Editor