Nikki Araguz and an Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome Diagnosis

[Shana A]

Thursday, September 9, 2010
Nikki Araguz and an Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome Diagnosis

http://thenikkiaraguztrial.blogspot.com/2010/01/nikki-araguz-and-androgen-insensitivity.html

Although many newspaper accounts have all but completely ignored the fact that Nikki Araguz was likely born with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), whether or not she was born with this genetic intersex condition could become an important, even essential, aspect of her defensive response to the probate lawsuit filed against her by Heather Delgado, her late husband's ex-wife, and Simona Longoria, her late husband's biological mother. Ample supporting and contextual evidence that Nikki Araguz was born with AIS has been presented in the media, with the possibility that historical medical records will follow later, along with DNA analysis to confirm what already seems apparent.

Some news articles have all but accused Nikki Araguz of faking or lying about her claim that she was born with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS). Other news articles have simply ignored the topic, and instead contain language that goes out of its way to refer to Nikki Araguz in ways whose apparent intent is to negate and/or dismiss her femaleness, femininity, and womanhood. Such news articles employ specious characterizations such as "ex-man", "born a man", "born a boy", and so on, when such statements may in fact be medically and scientifically misleading, if not patently incorrect. Only during the interview Nikki Araguz gave the Houston PBS television station, was the topic of AIS considered in any detail, or given much legitimacy.

[rejennyrated]

Whoa there!

Surely if she had CAIS then she would have been karotypically female and registered as female from birth? In that case the "operation" she had would not technically be SRS at all but an enlargement as the vaginal canal in such cases is blind and needs enlargement to be viable.

If that is the case then effectively the spin off from any judgement against her would be that every single person with the "appearance of a woman" in the USA would have to undergo a full chromasome test before marriage to prove they were "genuinely" female.

On the other hand is she was PAIS then she would have been an incompletely masculinised male - in which case its kind of irrelevant because in effect you still have to have SRS - so it's kind of just a variance on being trans and not entirely relevant either as there is no real correlation between the two conditions. It's just that statistically some people are going to have a bit of both.

Hmmm! I really hope it's option one because then all transwomen are off the hook - its the cis women who will dump themselves in the brown stuff - as in order for the judgement to be applied consistently it would mean that having the appearance of being female at birth would no longer be sufficient evidence that you ARE female!

Nice one guys