The target audience of OII appears to be individuals who identify as intersex and the wider society. Emphasis is placed on grass-roots activism, and their site emphasizes the importance of including the voices of individuals identifying as intersex. Through input from and interaction with the ‘intersexualized’, the group hopes to raise awareness
focus on individuals who identify as intersex and pathologization, OII’s approach can be conceptualized as that attempts to work outside of the medical discourse.
their rejection revolutionary, or
Different points of engagement with the discourse, or different starting points, involve different strategies and logic. In the medical realm the term ‘DSD’ is relevant, as it is intelligible through the logic of the normal/abnormal, ordered/disorded paradigm outlined by Foucault. ‘DSD’ is not relevant as an identity or as a base for collective action because of the stigmatizing associations with the word ‘disorder’. Differences in the discursive points of engagement of the SMOs have led to major differences over the creation and promotion of the particular code ‘DSD’. The same code can thus have very different meanings for each group, since each group approaches the code through different logic, levels of engagement with medical discourse, and strategic framing processes. Melucci’s analysis regarding the importance of codes as resources fought over by contemporary social movements remains relevant. Perhaps an important addition to the production and contestation over codes is the loading of codes, or how codes are loaded with meaning and what those codes mean for each of the SMOs involved and their target audiences. The meaning of ‘DSD’ is very different for each of the SMOs, and this influences how each group approaches, understands, and frames the code. More research is necessary in order to understand the concrete impacts of the debate over ‘DSD’ for the intersex social movement as a whole. The framing disputes over DSD