Sarah Richardson Sex Itself Analysis

Sex Itself: the Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome In “Sex Itself: the Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome,” Sarah Richardson begins her detailed analysis by considering the discovery of “odd chromosomes” in 1890 and their relation to sex. Concentrating on the experiments and methodology of five critical experimental biologists, Richardson illustrates the development of theories of sex determination. Theories of chromosomal determination of sex prominent at the time speculated about a system of sex determination that was nondeterminate and easily influenced by many variables, similar to the biocultural recognition of human variation in response to environment. Biocultural understandings of variation rely on epigenetic

Researchers attempted to sort the newly discovered chromosomes into preceding sex determination theories and opposed the explanation of the discrete genetic characters “maleness” and “femaleness” as representations of the X and Y chromosomes. The binary of XX and XY chromosomes, being female or male, respectfully, with little inclusion of intersex traits or genetic abnormalities, is described by Richardson throughout the text. For individuals like South African Olympian Caster Semenya, who is hyperandrogenous and may have XY chromosomes (Dr. Miller, 2/15/17, UC Berkeley), notions of X and Y chromosomes as empirical factors of sex and gender are not applicable. Richardson asserts that socially informed concepts of gender fundamentally impacted scientific research, including the vernacular used in publications and the subjects considered worthy of scientific examination. Richardson rejects notions of linear scientific progress, and examines the contributions of preexisting scientific concepts inform

The debate, which notably occurred during the 1990s and early 2000s between geneticists David Page and Jenny Graves, illustrates how the apprehension of males faced with decline of social status and masculinity contribute to the vernacular and research methods in conflicting Y chromosome evolution debates. David Page advocates the Y chromosome as the carrier of robust genes, created by selective pressure to propagate “maleness”. Inversely, Jenny Graves perceives genes on the Y chromosome degenerating, maintained not because of their “maleness,” but in spite of it. Richardson proposes that these conflicting views are not a product of “gender bias,” as the term does not elucidate the use of culture and politics in the respective research, nor the feelings or uncertainty intrinsically in their debate. Alternatively, Richardson proposes “gender valence,” which would examine communication between the research and the gender politics surrounding it, as a more holistic frame of the debate than “gender bias.” While “gender bias” could be employed in situations where gender operates invisibly, “gender valence” operates in situations where gender notions work visibly and intrinsically in